Guilty until proven Guilty

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8249020.stm

It seems that if someone works with kids, even just driving them about for a club, they must pay to get checked out first. Fair enough, but even if you do not have a criminal record, someone still can decide that you're guilty, and there's nothing you can do about it.

You have to pay out of your own pocket for someone to pass judgement on you. A judgement made not in a court of law, but by a bunch of ordinary people sat in an office.

I wonder how many people whose only motivation is to help kids have fun or get a good education will decide they've had enough, and decide they can't be bothered.

I'm all for making sure kids are safe, but if someone is going to have their background checked and are going to be judged, it should be at the expense of the person/organisation that wants the check done, and should be based on solid facts, or should happen in a court of law, and not based on unchallenged assumptions by some folks sat in an office somewhere.

 

This is the proposed changes to CRB checks I believe.

CRB checks are at best useless and at worst give people a very, very false sense of security.

It only flags up the ones who have been caught.


Sounds like yet another erosion of our civil liberties under the guise of "protecting us". Sounds like an offer we can't refuse.


It's an umbrella on a sunny day.


I hope it isn't being administered by the likes of the ones who let down that little boy recently, or those that "helped" Victoria Climbe










http://www.forsarah.com/html/sarahslaw.html




the principles of Sarah's Law require that the sex offender is a CONVICTED sex offender.

 

Quite right. I'd like to leave this place but I haven't managed to convince the wife yet. I keep on trying though.

 

Something has to be done, it is a fact that released paedophiles are free to offend again, and that despite it being mandatory that they register within 14days of release from prison, most don't. CRB checks are pointless. This is the wrong way to go about it. Despite the massive majority of people demanding that paedophiles are kept locked up away from the MOST vulnerable section of our society for the rest of their lives-they aren't. And we, as parents do not have a right to be informed of the dangers ever present around us-they exist, you can't convince me otherwise. I hold my youngest daughters hand when we cross the road, but I let her play out in the garden, or walk the 100 yds or so to her friends house watching her all the time. I am not comfortable when she is not in my sight-why? because people like Roy Whiting exist. They could be existing three doors down from me, they COULD be one of her friend's parents-and I do not know about it.


Perhaps I have misunderstood you Peri and if I have please correct me. It is not a "mistake" huge or otherwise, from their past, it is an abomination and needs to be kept under strict control-no excuses, no exception-no tolerance.


I also have no issue with ID cards, I have nothing to hide.

 

Once convicted of child abuse, rape, murder etc, the perpetrator should be forced to have their crime tattooed on their forehead.

Some would be outraged by a comment like that, "It's a violation of the basic human rights" they'd say. To which I say "what about the human rights of their victims? you choose to give up your 'human' rights when you become 'inhuman'".

ID cards won't help anyone. It will just be more money wasted, and unless a criminal is incredibly, unimaginably stupid, he/she isn't going to carry his/her ID card when they set out to commit a crime, so only innocent people will be picked on.

Back on topic, I think although kids need to be protected from weirdos, we are losing sight of the fact that weirdos (at least the malicious kind, as opposed to harmless eccentric weirdos) are a minority. That minority should still be controlled in some way certainly, but what worries me is that we as a society are heading towards believing that everyone is a malicious weirdo. We have lost faith in everything, we've become suspicious and distrustful of everybody. That is not protecting kids, we are at a point now where good people won't help kids in need for fear of being branded a weirdo. There was a tragic case a while ago where a toddler had found his way out of a nursery as wandering about near a main road. Some builders saw him and one was going to go and catch him before it was too late, but his mate pointed out that if he grabs someone else's kid he will be branded a paedo or a murderer. Nobody went to catch the kid, and the kid wandered into the road and was killed.

 

CRB checks might be pointless but not fun when you have to pay for it before your teeange children are even allowed to start a college course doing anything to do with child care/teaching etc.

We had one two years ago doing a pre-teaching course which cost us about £40 for the check.

One started this week just doing a child care course so another £40

Plus should either me or their dad have a criminal record they would be turned off the course !!!!

Good job I am a good girl really

Oh and a son that turns 16 in November who will become too old to attend youth club unless he signs up as a voulantry youth worker ...... so another check to be done !!!!

 

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...s+two+children+and+nursery+teacher/article.do


Were those nursery workers completely stupid?


It was their fault, and no one else's. I don't know the story, but if I leave my son or daughter in someone else's (allegedly) professional care then I hold them responsible.


It's the reason why our family live on one income and not two-my children are more important than a new car every three years or a holiday abroad every year.


I have to go and collect my daughter from school now, but will definitely be reading the responses to this. I can't be the only one.

 

Hi Peri, I take your point-I really do, I just can't risk it. They're my babies, I just can't risk it.

 

I think the CRB checks are a good idea. Yes, they do only flag up people with criminal records, but they'd make people think twice. Anything that makes it appear more secure for kids should be used. I think its disgraceful that untrained people who have not been through an inspection can be in positions of power with kids ie scouts etc.

ID cards I have no problem with - lets face it, most of us carry around bank cards & drivers licences anyway so how would that be any different?

As for kids being over protected - maybe they are but I think with good reason now a days! It depends on where you live I guess - little village where everyone knows everyone else, big town but safe area, big town and unsafe area etc.....

 

I agree in principle that CRB checks are a good idea for people that work with kids, but the new proposals are bad. Lets say it was me that was working with/planning to work with kids. I would have absolutely no objection whatsoever to somebody saying to me "we are going to check to see if you have a criminal record, and if so, what for". It wouldn't bother me in the least.

What I would object to is if someone said "we are going to see if you have a criminal record, or if some bureaucrat in an office who doesn't know you wishes to pass their own personal judgment against you because they're having a bad day, and you are going to pay for this". I'd tell them to go and get stuffed.

That's the key point. It is not a criminal record check. It is someone deciding what sort of person you are, without meeting you, without a court hearing, without references taken. Your kid bangs their head falling off their skateboard, the teacher notices the bruise and calls in social services. Its on record that you might be a risk. It doesn't matter if you explain to social services what actually happened, the incident is on record and someone who knows nothing about your case or you personally sits in an office, processes your check, and then tells your employer that you are a potential risk to kids. You haven't been to court, you haven't even been accused of a crime, but suddenly you're a weirdo. That's the problem with the new system.

 

Think of the irony......all the discussion above regarding these checks about driving other people's children around, yet they will let a man who murdered his wife and got treated in a psych unit, take the Knowledge test to become a licensed London cab driver. Hmmmmm - don't cab drivers pick up children and drive them to school? Don't they pick up the elderly and take them to doctor's appointments etc.? Don't they pick up a drunken teenage girl club hopping on a Friday night? A pretty good example of the way things are done here - they must come up with new ideas out of boredom and a reluctance to face the real problems of the world.

As for others driving my children anywhere? Well, I'll be the judge of who drives my children anywhere - I choose to work term time, school hours, and from home - so if my kids are off school sick, they're with me. I drop them at school and pick them up every day. I drive them to their after school activities - but......I do have very good friends who I trust implicitely, and who return that trust - and we do help each other out when there is crossed timetables. But, as in the past, have had no problem in politely saying 'no thanks' to an old neighbour who used to offer to take my kids to school one week, and I take theirs the next........didn't like the way they neglected thier own children, or abused his spouse - and I made a decision that my children would not be alone with him. But......there was no certificate needing rejecting before my gut instinct as a mother told me what the right thing was.
CRB's are good to a point - but.....as said above, they only get the ones who have been caught. Huntley was able to get one after all.
Being a criminal with a record is not a poor mistake - it's a part of a person's make up - particularly when a crime against a person. You are either that way inclined......or you are not.

 

I feel a lot of children will miss out because of all the new checks and rules.
I was a Guide leader. Would I do it now ...NO
I use to help at school with the PE and swimming lessons. Would I do it now ...NO
When my friends and neighbours had to work in the holidays I would watch their children.
Would I do it now ...NO
I used to baby sit to give the young couples in the area a night out. Would I do it now ...NO
I used to help at the local play group.Would I do it now... NO
I no of many people who have already given up working in kids clubs because they feel it is to risky.
Even though they are lovely trustworthy people they don't want to be put into a position that could be potentially dangerous to their reputation.
All it would take is one word from a disgruntled child or parent.
I was lucky I had the chance to work with children before all these new rules came out.
I loved it and gave many hours free.
As far as I am concerned the rules and regulations are a waste of time and money.
They can't get Scout and Guide workers now.
Schools and clubs are run with the help of volunteers and parents.
People will just not want to do it.
I think the country as gone mad.

 

Some interesting points raised here.
I used to help at my sons playschools [we all had to take our turn] and twice weekly at their school all before this CRB check was introduced.
My hubby had to have a CRB check when he helped manage the local football team and again for his chauffeur job- incidentally he has only once taken a young lad without his parents.
My son also had a CRB check for his job.
I have no problem with CRB checks or ID cards. None of us have been in trouble with the police-I think ANYTHING that can prevent hurting our precious children is fine by me.

I don't see how protecting our children can make them directionless and think things are handed out on a plate though.
Good parenting should provide them with the tools to become good citizens and respect the law.

 

What does a CRB check involve? Apart from going on a database (lets face it, we're all on one sort of government database, of one sort or another, so that shouldn't be an issue), I assume it means a criminal background check, etc?

 

Hi Sussex, I found this.
Standard disclosure

The standard disclosure is primarily for positions involving regular contact with children or vulnerable adults, but can also be used for some other professions of high responsibility (for example, accountancy). Standard Disclosures reveal details of any convictions, cautions, reprimands and final warnings the applicant has received, regardless of length of time since the incidents; together with details of whether that person is banned from working with children or vulnerable adults (if these details have been requested). The CRB aims to issue Standard Disclosures within 10 days of receipt of the application.

Standard CRB checks are primarily for posts that involve working with children or vulnerable adults. Standard checks may also be issued for people entering certain professions, such as members of the legal and accountancy professions. Standard checks contain the following;

Convictions, Cautions, Reprimands and Warnings held in England and Wales on the Police National Computer, the most of the relevant convictions in Scotland and Northern Ireland may also be included;