For instance, England has a government agency – the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) – whose job is to determine whether or not someone should be barred from working with children. This vetting process applies to volunteers as well as paid staff. Each paid individual who will work with children at a church must pay ISA a one-time registration fee (about $100) to be approved for their job by the agency. (Volunteers must go through the same registration process but are exempt from the fee.)

Approval is based upon making it through the screening process without raising any concerns such as pertinent criminal convictions, other cautions listed in their official records, or additional red flags raised by police or intelligence sources. Any concerns that do surface cause the person’s file to go to the agency’s examination board, which will determine the acceptability of the candidate. The files of all individuals who are approved are then continuously updated through automatic database searches. Further, any suspicious or inappropriate behavior around children that is observed by or submitted to an employer must be reported in a timely manner to the regulatory agency.

Reflecting the seriousness with which the Brits take the health and well-being of their children, these regulations will apply not only to churches but to any organization that deals with children – health care, educational, athletic, social service and faith-based organizations.

In my own travels I have found that the lengths to which churches go to protect children varies substantially. Even in states where the laws are fairly rigorous, compliance tends to be inconsistent. There are a couple of important insights I gleaned from some research the Barna Group conducted on this matter. First, the safety and well-being of their children is one of the most important attractions to parents who visit a church. If the ministry does not impress the parents with its commitment to ensuring the security and care for their child, the parents are unlikely to return to that church, regardless of their reaction to the church’s ministry to adults.

Second, we discovered that churches that are most effective at helping parents to raise spiritually healthy and active children place such security matters at the head of its priority list. We saw that such churches typically go well beyond whatever the government statutes require in an honest effort to do “everything possible” to make sure that children are well taken care of while they are under the umbrella of the church.

Think about what you have seen or experienced related to the ministry to children at churches you have attended or visited. How adequately do you think we protect our children? What could we do better? Is there anything significant to adopt from the British approach?