When to Move Child Record to Head of Household

What criteria do you use to move a membership record out from a household and create a new Head of Household?

We are trying to focus on the transition that young men and young women make going from the YM/YW organization to Priesthood and Relief Society. When we pulled reports on YSA members, we discovered that we have a mix of memebers still being listed with their parents and some as head of household, some beng lsited with thier parents are in their mid-20s.

Depending on the whim of the ward clerk, if the member left home to go to school and them came back home, some membership records were accepted back into the ward as a head of household others were put back into their parent's houshold.

Our biggest concern are those that are less active when their records stay as a child record under the parents. Home Teachers and Visiting Teachers vist the 'Household' but many times the inactive child is not there and does not get any church contact.

We are thinking that if we could come up with a process to identify when to move child membership records out from the parents household and create a Head of Household record for the child, it will allow the Priesthood and Relief Society to assign home teachers and visiting teachers to them.

Our delima is when should a child membership record be convereted to a head of household record? As soon as they are eligible to attend Priesthood or Relief Society meetings (18 and out of high school)? Wait until after their missions or leave for school? What if they don't go to college or go on a mission?

I think it's safe to say that if the child isn't living with the parents, except in maybe rare circumstances, they shouldn't be grouped with the parents.

This is a situation that's up to the Bishop (not the clerk). However the best suggestion I've seen is that one the child leaves, they would not be re-grouped with the parents, even they move back home. But that's just a suggestion based on prior threads on the subject.

Now, that said, when I was a membership clerk for a student Ward, there were times I moved them out with "regroup with parents" since the record needed to be moved out, but I didn't know where the parents where.

I think you are looking at all the important factors when making a decision of this nature. I think a clerk has the responsibility to counsel with the Bishop about those individuals elegible to be their own head of household and let the Bishop make the decision case by case. Establishing a standard to fit all situations is just not practical.

Personally, I think making an adult child their own head of household even when living at home with parents has benefits that outweigh the detriments, especially when the welfare of the adult child needs separate attention. So to me that means that when an adult child transitions from YM/YW they should be seriously considered to be their own head of household.

RussellHltn wrote:the best suggestion I've seen is that one the child leaves, they would not be re-grouped with the parents, even they move back home. But that's just a suggestion based on prior threads on the subject.

I like this suggestion, but if the returned child is on a mission (or about to be), I would group them with the parents.

Greggo wrote:I like this suggestion, but if the returned child is on a mission (or about to be), I would group them with the parents.

My general rule of thumb for becoming a separate household (when I flag it for the wards as stake membership clerk) is the September 1st after the 18th birthday. Exceptions include serving missionaries (I tend to look the other way for elders age 19-22 unless I know they aren't out on missions); diminished mental capacity (whether baptized or not accountable); those in the military whose records the ward is supposed to sit on (usually in basic training.)

Usually our stake's YSA branch (or a ward at one of the Church schools) lassos in a record right around the end of August, or not long after a missionary returns home, so for the more active YSA it isn't a problem. When we went to MLS nearly six years ago, though, my stake had around 350 "children" 18+ linked to parents. That number is greatly diminished now, but I still try to be vigilant about it as we still have some 40-somethings linked to parents.

Usually the hangup is linking missionaries back with parents. Then there's the multi-generation household one ward has . . .

The rule of thumb we've always used is "on their own", and yes, that's subjective. I'm not sure that a college student living with mom and dad or a missionary applies. Certainly, turning 18 is no automatic qualifier. If Mom and Dad are still paying for car insurance and a cell phone, can the kid really call himself the head of his own household?

Our stake's policy is to pull the records of all youth to the YSA when they graduate from high school. Most of them will be made head of household in May or June and moved unless there is some factor that makes that unwise. It does get interesting when they graduate before their 18th birthday - there are privacy rules in place in MLS and they are still listed as Young Men/Women. The Action and Interview report shows them as needing the semi-annual interviews still. We have to re-assign them to the Elders Quorum and Relief Society as appropriate.

The cool thing about this is we have an annual injection of these excited, energetic youth every year for about three months before they head off for school. Gives them a chance for some independent church activity and callings while many are still at home. Down side is our attendance plummets every September (about 27 percent).

Depending on the whim of the ward clerk, if the member left home to go to school and them came back home, some membership records were accepted back into the ward as a head of household others were put back into their parent's houshold.

Well, I'd say that the clerk should be inspired enough to do the right thing practically everytime. One gets a 'feel' for what is going on with each member's case.

Having said that as a proviso, I'd think that if we don't move away the records of missionaries in the field nor ungroup them as single head of households when serving in some mission overseas, then we probably shouldn't ungroup a family because a 21 or 25 year old is away for a semester studying. So if Home teaching is assigned they would be seen as part of the normal family when they are back home during breaks.

Maybe the rule of thumb should be to only make them HoH when they firmly declare that they have moved 'out of home' and are working or self supporting or marry. But if they are going home to get their washing done or to eat a proper meal that mum makes, then surely they shouldn't be HoH, in my opinion.

charly3358 wrote:Maybe the rule of thumb should be to only make them HoH when they firmly declare that they have moved 'out of home' and are working or self supporting or marry. But if they are going home to get their washing done or to eat a proper meal that mum makes, then surely they shouldn't be HoH, in my opinion.

If someone is not living under the same roof as his or her parents (especially for three months or more), he/she most certainly should be a separate household because his/her address is different. We have to at least make an effort to close the barn doors before the horse bolts, not wait until we are absolutely sure the horse is gone. (See my post above about 40-somethings still grouped with their parents.)

charly3358 wrote:Having said that as a proviso, I'd think that if we don't move away the records of missionaries in the field nor ungroup them as single head of households when serving in some mission overseas, then we probably shouldn't ungroup a family because a 21 or 25 year old is away for a semester studying. So if Home teaching is assigned they would be seen as part of the normal family when they are back home during breaks.

The records of missionaries usually stay in their home ward in order to facilitate the finances, mission applications, temple recommends, etc. I have always made them their own head of house in the past and have never run afoul of the bishop or stake presidency. When the person goes to college and/or to a YSA unit, they have to be made the head of house or grouped with someone else in that unit. The YSA is responsible for home/visiting teaching that individual. We have a good share of our branch that leave for school (and have their records transferred to the ward there) and then come back to the branch for summer. They don't go back to the family ward except in unusual circumstances. Our stake has made it clear that they expect them to go to the branch unless there is some issue that makes that not possible. We have several members that live at home and have significant mental and physical disabilities. They are still at the branch and it is gratifying to see the other "normal" kids step up to include them.

idjeeper wrote:Our stake has made it clear that they expect them to go to the branch unless there is some issue that makes that not possible.

The last time I read the Handbook, I found that it had a very different "attitude" about it.

It sounds like most options have been explored. Just to chime in my 2 cents - I ask our ward clerks to separate YSAs when they have their own home teachers. If they are still living with their family and visited by the "family HT", then they are not a HoH. One HT per family (or HoH) is the guiding rule here.

RussellHltn wrote:The last time I read the Handbook, I found that it had a very different "attitude" about it.

Can you please give me a reference? I would like to know if we are doing it wrong.

IIRC, the jist was that it seems that having singles in a family ward was preferred, but that the singles could go to a singles ward.

I know when I was in that age bracket, some singles didn't want to go the singles ward. I think they enjoyed the callings they had as part of a family ward, but that's just speculation.

At any rate, it's something that the appropriate leaders may want to consult the manual.

When I had access to it, I found the manual to be somewhat like the scriptures - you always got something new out of each each time you read it because you were finding answers to problems you didn't know existed the first time your read it.

idjeeper wrote:

RussellHltn wrote:The last time I read the Handbook, I found that it had a very different "attitude" about it.

Can you please give me a reference? I would like to know if we are doing it wrong.

For example, priesthood leaders may gain some insights from CHI Book 1 [2006], p 168, the beginning of the first paragraph under "Single Member Wards and Branches." Similar language is on p 126.

Thanks, I will check those pages out tomorrow.

Thought I had better return and report. I read the CHI references and see where the concern lies, especially with respect to 18-20 year-olds. I think I also overstated what my Stake expects. The guidance they give is that for YSAs, there are three options: stay in the family ward, go to the YSA Branch, or if, and only if, they are a student, they can go to the university ward/branch. They then go on to say that since the stake has a YSA branch, they encourage them to go there (not require). I got my original interpretation from some of the bishops who basically said, you're 18 and graduated so you're out of here. For most of the YSAs that was fine with them, but I know of a few who really wanted to stay with family. We have some training to do.

I also think that Russell was right on with comparing the CHI to the scriptures. In fact the opening paragraphs say that leaders are expected to read and apply the instructions with the guidance of the spirit.

Sorry to the original poster for the hijack, but thanks to all for the opinions expressed.

idjeeper wrote:The guidance they give is that for YSAs, there are three options: stay in the family ward, go to the YSA Branch, or if, and only if, they are a student, they can go to the university ward/branch.

As a ward clerk in a YSA ward, my understanding is that the university wards have become simply YSA wards, including all young single adults within the ward's geographical area, unless they choose to attend a conventional ward.

GreyWolf wrote:As a ward clerk in a YSA ward, my understanding is that the university wards have become simply YSA wards, including all young single adults within the ward's geographical area, unless they choose to attend a conventional ward.

The correct phrase seems to be "student", and they still exist.

It's not unheard of for local leaders to ignore the "student" part and accept all singles in the area.

RussellHltn wrote:The correct phrase seems to be "student", and they still exist.

It's not unheard of for local leaders to ignore the "student" part and accept all singles in the area.

There are significant changes underway for YSA units, and the plan is for student units to cease to exist -- they would become YSA units. That has already happened in some areas, but as far as I know, it has not been broadly implemented quite yet.

Alan_Brown wrote:There are significant changes underway for YSA units, and the plan is for student units to cease to exist -- they would become YSA units.

Oh, my. Such a change from around 15 years ago when "a letter" closed down many language and singles wards, but didn't touch the student wards.

RussellHltn wrote:Oh, my. Such a change from around 15 years ago when "a letter" closed down many language and singles wards, but didn't touch the student wards.

Well, my language was a bit strong. It's not like the student wards will be disbanded -- they will just become less specialized and will service all YSA in their boundaries. My guess is that in areas with a strong student presence the student unit structure will be mostly intact and will tend to absorb the much smaller YSA units in the area. But exactly how such units will be realigned will clearly be decided on a case-by-case basis.

Alan_Brown wrote:Well, my language was a bit strong. It's not like the student wards will be disbanded -- they will just become less specialized and will service all YSA in their boundaries. My guess is that in areas with a strong student presence the student unit structure will be mostly intact and will tend to absorb the much smaller YSA units in the area. But exactly how such units will be realigned will clearly be decided on a case-by-case basis.

That could be interesting. In the case of my ward, that would split the YSAs into three different wards since our boundaries overlap with three different single student wards. The other challenge I see is that many of the student wards discontinue all meetings during the summer.

A young man in our Ward turned 18 on 1 Mar 2011. I validated his MLS organization assignments on 28 Feb 2011: he was assigned to the Priests Quorum and to Sunday School-Class 17. On 1 Mar 2011, MLS automatically assigned this member to the Young Single Adults, but left him in the Priests Quorum and Sunday School Class 17. I would have expected him to be assigned to the Elders Quorum and the Gospel Doctrine Sunday School Class -- except for the fact that he was 17 at the beginning of the school year!

I contacted MLS Support and was told that he should have been assigned to the Elders Quorum and Gospel Doctrine Class; obviously that did not happen. It was suggested that I report my findings via this venue. Personally, I think MLS Support changes the programming algorithm from time-to-time, as the opening Post in this thread seems to suggest. I think it is imperative that the "user" be informed of programming changes effecting their Church callings and that a definitive position be established.

But first I researched the new MLS Help PDF Manual and found two (2) references that tend to address this specific issue. (Many of the other related issues addressed in this thread, as far as I'm concerned, are separately delineated in the Help Manual and in the new CHI, Book 2.) Please review these 2 references and form your own inspired opinion: (1) Head of Household, (2) Young Single Adults.

Please note that in the 1st paragraph under 'young single adults' on p. 20 the wording, "...after graduation from high school...." The MLS Support tech to whom I spoke also referred to this criteria, and this indicates to me that these individuals are to be "advanced", so to speak, at age 18.

It should also be noted that anyone listed in the Directory as a "child", as part of a household organization, regardless of age, is NOT counted in the Ward Unit Statistics as a "Household". When these Young Single Adults and Single Adults are set up as their own Head-of-Household, this increases the Household Unit Statistic.

coletheelder wrote:A young man in our Ward turned 18 on 1 Mar 2011. I validated his MLS organization assignments on 28 Feb 2011: he was assigned to the Priests Quorum and to Sunday School-Class 17. On 1 Mar 2011, MLS automatically assigned this member to the Young Single Adults, but left him in the Priests Quorum and Sunday School Class 17. I would have expected him to be assigned to the Elders Quorum and the Gospel Doctrine Sunday School Class -- except for the fact that he was 17 at the beginning of the school year!

It's correct that he would become a YSA, since the only definition of that is that a member has to be single and 18-30 years old.

However, he should not be moved automatically to the Elders Quorum, if he still is a Priest. In fact, he should never get moved to the Elders Quorum automatically, unless he is actually ordained an elder. If no ordination occurs, he will stay in the Priests Quorum until he turns 19, at which point he will become a prospective elder and be moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course) because the HPG is responsible by default for prospective elders.

And the Sunday School class won't change automatically on his birthday, either, since those changes occur as the calendar year rolls over.

coletheelder wrote:I contacted MLS Support and was told that he should have been assigned to the Elders Quorum and Gospel Doctrine Class; obviously that did not happen. It was suggested that I report my findings via this venue.

The people in MLS Support do a great job most of the time, but sometimes they don't get the answer correct. The rep you talked with was most certainly wrong about Elders Quorum.

coletheelder wrote:Personally, I think MLS Support changes the programming algorithm from time-to-time, as the opening Post in this thread seems to suggest. I think it is imperative that the "user" be informed of programming changes effecting their Church callings and that a definitive position be established.

MLS Support is unable to change the programming algorithm. That is done by the developers. And I saw no suggestion of that in the OP, anyway.

coletheelder wrote:But first I researched the new MLS Help PDF Manual and found two (2) references that tend to address this specific issue. (Many of the other related issues addressed in this thread, as far as I'm concerned, are separately delineated in the Help Manual and in the new CHI, Book 2.) Please review these 2 references and form your own inspired opinion: (1) Head of Household, (2) Young Single Adults.

Please note that in the 1st paragraph under 'young single adults' on p. 20 the wording, "...after graduation from high school...." The MLS Support tech to whom I spoke also referred to this criteria, and this indicates to me that these individuals are to be "advanced", so to speak, at age 18.

MLS does have some default behavior at the beginning of a year and at birthdays. However, some of that behavior of moving people to different organizations can be overridden at the bishop's direction. MLS usually implements the most common behavior automatically, but allows you to change it as needed.

coletheelder wrote:It should also be noted that anyone listed in the Directory as a "child", as part of a household organization, regardless of age, is NOT counted in the Ward Unit Statistics as a "Household". When these Young Single Adults and Single Adults are set up as their own Head-of-Household, this increases the Household Unit Statistic.

That's true. It doesn't really relate to the rest of this post, however. Splitting a person into a separate household always requires manual action -- it never happens on a birthday or any other calendar event.

aebrown wrote: That's true. It doesn't really relate to the rest of this post, however. Splitting a person into a separate household always requires manual action -- it never happens on a birthday or any other calendar event.

I apparently mixed apples and oranges when talking about organizations as well as a Head of Household. But the opening post in this thread is entitled, "When to Move Child Record to Head of Household", and this specific question has not been answered, definitively, at least from what I can tell. If Unit Statistics are important and used as a measure at any level by the Church, but let's say Ward and Stake, for example (I don't know where the measuring begins or ends), then the "Head of Household" statistic is skewed by an undefined "manual" operation because our Ward had 30, 40, and 50-year old Single Adults still listed as a "child record". Is the "Head of Household" unit statistic is important, specifically, at the Ward level, then when should I manually make that child record their own head of household?

coletheelder wrote:But the opening post in this thread is entitled, "When to Move Child Record to Head of Household", and this specific question has not been answered, definitively, at least from what I can tell.

Definitive answer: It's up to the bishop to decide what's in the best interest of the member(s) involved.

aebrown wrote:However, he should not be moved automatically to the Elders Quorum, if he still is a Priest. In fact, he should never get moved to the Elders Quorum automatically, unless he is actually ordained an elder. If no ordination occurs, he will stay in the Priests Quorum until he turns 19, at which point he will become a prospective elder and be moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course) because the HPG is responsible by default for prospective elders.

(I should have used a Multi-Quote for the previous reply, I'm still learning.) I am confused when, as you say, "...a prospective elder (is) moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course). Weekly/Monthly Attendance records can only be generated for those members listed in the either the Elders Quorum or High Priests Group. (1) With which priesthood organization do the =>19 year-old prospective elders meet during Priesthood?
(2) Which organization is then responsible for the Weekly/Monthly Attendance records which, in turn, impacts data accumulation for the Quarterly Report?

aebrown wrote:However, he should not be moved automatically to the Elders Quorum, if he still is a Priest. In fact, he should never get moved to the Elders Quorum automatically, unless he is actually ordained an elder. If no ordination occurs, he will stay in the Priests Quorum until he turns 19, at which point he will become a prospective elder and be moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course) because the HPG is responsible by default for prospective elders.

Then, at what point in time does a Laurel move to the Relief Society organization?

coletheelder wrote:(I should have used a Multi-Quote for the previous reply, I'm still learning.) I am confused when, as you say, "...a prospective elder (is) moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course). Weekly/Monthly Attendance records can only be generated for those members listed in the either the Elders Quorum or High Priests Group. (1) With which priesthood organization do the =>19 year-old prospective elders meet during Priesthood?
(2) Which organization is then responsible for the Weekly/Monthly Attendance records which, in turn, impacts data accumulation for the Quarterly Report?

Handbook 2, 7.6.1:

"Quorum and group leaders have the responsibility to help prospective elders prepare to receive the Melchizedek Priesthood. The bishop counsels with quorum and group leaders and each prospective elder to determine whether the prospective elder should meet with the elders quorum or the high priests group for instruction and activities. The bishop considers the relationships the prospective elder may have with the elders or high priests in the ward and the age and needs of the prospective elder.
[...]
"Quorum and group leaders invite prospective elders to attend quorum or group meetings and activities."

So, a prospective elder could be assigned to the Elders Quorum or the High Priest's Quorum. I'd assume the assigned quorum would be responsible for the roles for their assigned members.

coletheelder wrote:Then, at what point in time does a Laurel move to the Relief Society organization?

Handbook 2, 9.1.4:
"A young woman normally advances into Relief Society on her 18th birthday or in the coming year. By age 19, each young woman should be fully participating in Relief Society. Because of individual circumstances, such as personal testimony and maturity, school graduation, desire to continue with peers, and college attendance, a young woman may advance into Relief Society earlier than her 18th birthday or remain in Young Women longer. Each young woman counsels with her parents and the bishop to decide what will best help her remain an active participant in the Church.

"Young Women and Relief Society leaders work together to make the transition into Relief Society successful for each young woman.'

RussellHltn wrote:Handbook 2, 7.6.1:

"Quorum and group leaders have the responsibility to help prospective elders prepare to receive the Melchizedek Priesthood. The bishop counsels with quorum and group leaders and each prospective elder to determine whether the prospective elder should meet with the elders quorum or the high priests group for instruction and activities. The bishop considers the relationships the prospective elder may have with the elders or high priests in the ward and the age and needs of the prospective elder.
[...]
"Quorum and group leaders invite prospective elders to attend quorum or group meetings and activities."

So, a prospective elder could be assigned to the Elders Quorum or the High Priest's Quorum. I'd assume the assigned quorum would be responsible for the roles for their assigned members.

In this quote, you started by indicating "Quorum and group leaders have the responsibility to help prospective elders prepare to receive the Melchizedek Priesthood...." In an earlier quote, it was stated that "If no ordination occurs, he will stay in the Priests Quorum until he turns 19, at which point he will become a prospective elder and be moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course) because the HPG is responsible by default for prospective elders."

It seems to me that the "default" status you describe, requiring a "manual" move, is a temporary one on a Clerk's part, until the Quorum, Group Leaders, and the Bishop counsel together and counsel with the member -- decide which quorum he is organizationally assigned to based on all criteria you referenced from CHI, Book 2. Is the "default", "manual" move, in fact, temporary during the period of counseling?

My confusion, at this moment, is based on the fact that in our Ward only ordained Elders are listed in that organization; every other male member is listed in the HP organization. Under these conditions, it is virtually impossible for me to help the Leaders generate accurate attendance records and ultimately Quarterly Reports, and I'm at a loss as to how to help them.

coletheelder wrote:In this quote, you started by indicating "Quorum and group leaders have the responsibility to help prospective elders prepare to receive the Melchizedek Priesthood...." In an earlier quote, it was stated that "If no ordination occurs, he will stay in the Priests Quorum until he turns 19, at which point he will become a prospective elder and be moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course) because the HPG is responsible by default for prospective elders."

It seems to me that the "default" status you describe, requiring a "manual" move, is a temporary one on a Clerk's part, until the Quorum, Group Leaders, and the Bishop counsel together and counsel with the member -- decide which quorum he is organizationally assigned to based on all criteria you referenced from CHI, Book 2. Is the "default", "manual" move, in fact, temporary during the period of counseling?

Don't confuse "manual" and "default". The default move to prospective elder status and membership in the HPG organization is automatic -- it occurs when a male turns 19 and has not been ordained to the Melchizedek Priesthood or manually moved to either the Elders Quorum or HPG. Either the automatic or manual move is "permanent" in the sense that no other automatic action will be taken.

But the priesthood leaders involved should be counseling with each other and with the bishop to give the proper care needed for each individual long before he turns 19. So the default automatic move should happen rarely if those leaders are ministering to their members.

coletheelder wrote:My confusion, at this moment, is based on the fact that in our Ward only ordained Elders are listed in that organization; every other male member is listed in the HP organization. Under these conditions, it is virtually impossible for me to help the Leaders generate accurate attendance records and ultimately Quarterly Reports, and I'm at a loss as to how to help them.

You can print a list of prospective elders. That will show you which members are in the HPG simply because of their age. The priesthood leaders can then look at that list and prayerfully consider how the needs of those members can best be met. Then as a clerk you can follow their direction and manually move designated members to the Elders Quorum.

aebrown wrote: You can print a list of prospective elders. That will show you which members are in the HPG simply because of their age.

I'm not at Church right now. I've tried sorting such a report on 'age' and then printing it. The report always prints in alphabetical order, I believe. It would be very helpful to sort, perhaps on any of the columns, and then print the report in that format. Is this possible?

coletheelder wrote:I'm not at Church right now. I've tried sorting such a report on 'age' and then printing it. The report always prints in alphabetical order, I believe. It would be very helpful to sort, perhaps on any of the columns, and then print the report in that format. Is this possible?

The easiest way to get a list of the Prospective Elders is to go to Reports/Forms > Unit Statistics, then click on Prospective Elders. The report that is displayed does not have an Age column, but it does have a birthdate column, which is pretty much the same thing. You can click on any of the column headers to sort by that column before you print the report.

Thank you for identifying an alternative solution. But how about making our reports more user-friendly (a not-so-new concept) by calculating an Age instead of just plugging in a Birth date. Computers are so fast these days.

What do you mean in your post when you refer to a list "That will show you which members are in the HPG simply because of their age."?

I know from experience that age 50 or 55 has been used as a practical approach to delineating between the Elders Quorum and the HPG, thus keeping the younger, hail, and hearty men separated from the old men, like myself.

However, in an earlier reply when I asked for a definitive answer, it was "Definitive answer: It's up to the bishop to decide what's in the best interest of the member(s) involved." Are you suggesting that the Bishop could use an age such as 50 or 55, for example, as a quick reference guide as to who attends the Elders Quorum versus who attend the HPG?

If that is still a practical approach, a reasonable approach, call it what you will, for that end of the age spectrum, then our only trials and tribulations will come from the Leaders getting it right for the young men in the 18-30 age range. Is that a reasonable assumption on my part for putting "square pegs in round holes"?

coletheelder wrote:What do you mean in your post when you refer to a list "That will show you which members are in the HPG simply because of their age."?

I said absolutely nothing about older brethren. I was speaking only of males who do not hold the MP who turn 19, and thus are classified as Prospective Elders, and thus are automatically moved into the HPG. Everything you said about older brethren is an entirely new topic.

Now you're telling me that those Prospective Elders that are age 19 "are automatically moved into the HPG." I wish we could have gotten all the 'automatics' out of the way at the beginning of this thread. What are the other 'automatics' that I need to know about and where are they documented?

OK, and just where can I find out "about older brethren in an entirely new topic."? This topic causes a lot of angst among our leaders and leaves a lot to be desired in terms of guidelines. I think you'll have to admit that older "members are in the HPG simply because of their age", and that's how I was also interpreting what you said.

You've got me so buried in these threads that it's getting difficult "to see the forest for the trees"! And I thought I was still doing OK for myself at age 77.

The difinitive guide is the Handbook. Handbook 1 is only for the Bishopric. But you can read Handbook 2 here.

Now, how the leadership interprets the guidelines is a different matter. Some may use simplistic rules. Others may go more by the spirit.

coletheelder wrote:Now you're telling me that those Prospective Elders that are age 19 "are automatically moved into the HPG." I wish we could have gotten all the 'automatics' out of the way at the beginning of this thread. What are the other 'automatics' that I need to know about and where are they documented?

MLS generally follows the procedures outlined in the Handbooks. It is the Handbook that says a young man becomes a Prospective Elder at age 19 if he is not ordained an elder. It is the Handbook that says the high priests group has primary responsibility for prospective elders. MLS simply does with a membership record what the Handbook says should happen to a member without any intervention by the bishop.

coletheelder wrote:This topic causes a lot of angst among our leaders and leaves a lot to be desired in terms of guidelines.

When you mention "angst among our leaders", I always recommend going to the Handbook first. Everything else follows from there. Even the MLS software, oddly enough.

coletheelder wrote:Now you're telling me that those Prospective Elders that are age 19 "are automatically moved into the HPG." I wish we could have gotten all the 'automatics' out of the way at the beginning of this thread. What are the other 'automatics' that I need to know about and where are they documented?

Way back in my first reply to your first post in this thread, I said, "If no ordination occurs, he will stay in the Priests Quorum until he turns 19, at which point he will become a prospective elder and be moved to the High Priests group organizationally (not by priesthood office, of course) because the HPG is responsible by default for prospective elders."

So I think I did mention the relevant automatic move at the beginning. There is no other automatic move for MP quorums because of age. As others have mentioned, the Handbooks document the policy for prospective elders, and MLS simply implements it with the automatic move.

coletheelder wrote:OK, and just where can I find out "about older brethren in an entirely new topic."? This topic causes a lot of angst among our leaders and leaves a lot to be desired in terms of guidelines. I think you'll have to admit that older "members are in the HPG simply because of their age", and that's how I was also interpreting what you said.

Not every post stands on its own. We're having a conversation on a topic. You started the topic by mentioning someone who turned 18, and my responses have been in that context.

I'm sorry I misinterpreted your wording, "and be moved to". I took that to mean a manual move by me. I tend to interpret the words I read literally, and since I didn't see 'moved by the system' or 'moved automatically' in the context of your original explanation, I was led astray. Thank you for the follow-up.

In my post #26, I raised a question about the HoH statistic in the Unit Statistics Report in relation to "When to Move a Child Record to Head of Household". The HoH statistic increases when a 'child' record is made their own HoH, irregardless of their age.

All of the early posts in this thread, from what I read, mentioned different circumstances such as YSA wards, full-time missionaries away from home, military service, etc. But no one has connected those situations to their effect on a statistical measurement for each Unit.

I've tried to find other threads containing keywords related to the Unit Statistics because I thought that perhaps I was straying too far afield. I found no significant references elsewhere, so I'm including it here because I think it is relevant to the original question.

Is a Unit's HoH statistic in the Unit Statistic Report a non-issue. Does it have some meaning to someone, somewhere? Or, am I the only one noticing that when a child record is changed to a HoH record, that change affects a unit statistic?

coletheelder wrote:In my post #26, I raised a question about the HoH statistic in the Unit Statistics Report in relation to "When to Move a Child Record to Head of Household". The HoH statistic increases when a 'child' record is made their own HoH, irregardless of their age.

Correct. But the well-being of the member(s) is more important then any stat. The Church has not given a precisely defined mechanical process for deciding when a member "graduates" from being a child to becoming a HoH at the same address.

In my opinion, any leader who primarily bases their decision on how it affects the Unit Statistics report is leading for the wrong reason.

This has been an interesting thread, with good insight, and we have been all over the place. Years ago I was taught that it is the responsibility of the bishop to make the decision when an older child is listed as a separate HOH. (for those living within his ward) He does this by looking at what is in the best interest of the member. If an unmarried member is living at home and the bishop wants the family to be home taught together then they are grouped as a family. If the bishop feels that a member needs separate home teachers then the member is listed as a separate HOH. This is my understanding.

Disclaimer: I'm writing this because I think it would be wise for those in charge of the directory system to consider the implications of having adults in the same household as their parents (and for others to know several of the implications). I don't want to sound like I'm complaining. Those in charge of the directory system can do whatever they want with this matter—I still sustain them, whatever they choose. (I mean the same for my bishop concerning his decisions about household placement and home teaching, too.)

Why are any adults grouped in the same household at all (other than husband and wife)? The process could be automated (just have it automatically split them up when they turn 18), and then we can spend our time on something else besides deciding who goes where (I've been a ward clerk a few times, myself, too, granted, away from home).

Anyway, I, for one, am now 35. I lived away from home for seven years (and I was only going to school for about the first two of those years). I returned. Then, they put me in the same household as my mother again (that has been the state since 2011).

What this means is that I can't set my own privacy settings. So, because my mother has everything she can unlisted, I can't list my address (so, no one can find me through the directory, even though I want them to). Since my Mother has a different last name than I do, that means people will have difficulty finding my phone number and email address, even though they're visible. Being in the household also means I never get my own home teachers.

Rather than 'regroup with parents' being an option for adults, why not have 'send to parents' ward' be an option instead?

To add further to the matter, I've had a younger, married sibling and maybe also a divorced sibling with children living in the same house as my mother, too, at the same time, and they were put under their own household(s), and got their own home teachers. So, we can't say they're not giving me my own household in order to protect the privacy of my mother's address (because I'm pretty sure they could set their own privacy).

Anyway, I get the impression some people in the ward think I'm a lot younger than I am, largely because of this household thing in the directory.

To further compound the problem, I can't even see my own address in the online directory to verify whether it's correct or incorrect. I'm guessing it's incorrect since the online donation statements have my old address from before I moved home! That means the official tax statements, which list my old address, are problematic (since I lived in a different state before, and the IRS might give me issues if they saw that I didn't pay taxes in the other state that the tax statement says I lived in). I just learned this, since we got the announcement that we can make Church donations online, now (and I checked it out). However, I thought that at tithing settlement they showed my current address and had me verify it, several times, since then (I would have noticed my old address; I'm pretty thorough). So, it's possibly a bug in the donation statements or something. So, I'll have to contact my clerk and ask about it. Anyway, if I've been mailed anything at that old address, I've never received it.

Another issue is the psychological impact of having adults grouped in the same household as their parents (especially when not all adults, let alone adults in the household, are grouped like that). It doesn't help one towards independence to do that, and it makes it seem like people don't think you're significant (whether or not they do, unless they say otherwise and you can tell they mean it).

In a society like ours, problems like this will undoubtedly continue to happen unless the system is automated, because not everyone has time to care about it, and if they do, they might not be considering all the facts (or even have them).

Automating it will not only help individuals have the things they need, but it will give bishops and clerks (as well as people using the directory) one less thing to worry about.

mark_h_dewey wrote:Rather than 'regroup with parents' being an option for adults, why not have 'send to parents' ward' be an option instead?

I believe this is a good suggestion, but I would not go so far as to automate the removal from household process at a certain age. There are valid reasons for a person to remain in a household even when they turn 18.

However, if I were you, I would immediately see my clerk and get my record moved out and set up as its own head of household. If the clerk gives you any grief, speak with your bishop. I suspect, in your case at least, that they just haven't thought it through and know your desires.

They should have no objection, in my opinion.

mark_h_dewey wrote:I can't list my address (so, no one can find me through the directory, even though I want them to). Since my Mother has a different last name than I do, that means people will have difficulty finding my phone number and email address, even though they're visible. Being in the household also means I never get my own home teachers.

While you have some valid issues with the directory, I'd talk to the bishop about having you moved to your own household.

mark_h_dewey wrote:To further compound the problem, I can't even see my own address in the online directory to verify whether it's correct or incorrect. I'm guessing it's incorrect since the online donation statements have my old address from before I moved home!

That sounds like a different problem. The address is not attached to the member, but to the household. At this point I suspect that your records haven't moved back home. Perhaps you have a duplicate membership record. I'd work with the ward membership clerk to check on that.

As a YSA who returned to the family ward and was grouped with my parents for a period of time, I was incredibly frustrated. Many communications are sent to the head of household and my parents didn't always pass the information along because they thought that as an adult, the relief society/bishopric would communicate directly with me. Many of the adults in the ward treated me nostalgically as still a YW even though I had graduated years earlier and had served a mission. Once my record was separated from my parents, I was more likely to be treated as an adult by members of the Ward rather than as a glorified youth.

Remember that many YSA's that are living at home maybe doing so due to economic difficulties, but are trying to seperate themselves and want to be treated as an adult. Sometimes the recognition of being their own head of household is the morale boost that they are looking for.

I have a 14 year old that is moving from his parents who adopted him back to his birth mothers home. His birth mother is not a member. In transferring his records does his adoptive father still show up as head of household?

I think you're able to only send the child over

denniscarver@q.com wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2023 4:00 am I have a 14 year old that is moving from his parents who adopted him back to his birth mothers home. His birth mother is not a member. In transferring his records does his adoptive father still show up as head of household?

If you're sending just the child over, he will be his own household. It's up to the receiving ward if there's a household on their end they want to put him under.

Here's a good Help Center FAQ describing what a Household is, as well as what the Head of Household is:
Make Changes to Member Households