Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@forumhostpb wrote:
There will always be the relatively few people who manage to avoid detection for a while (and thus pass their CRB check) but when you think about it, there really isn’t another way of dealing with this issue.
It would be wrong to assume that anyone CRB checked is “safe”. I think it leads people into a false sense of security. Of course check everyone, as long as it is understood that just being clearned during a CRB check does not mean you are automatically to be trusted. However, I don’t like the idea that we are in a society where everyone is guilty until proved innocent.
@forumhostpb wrote:
Actually minim, i don’t totally agree with you here. I’m a governor of a primary school and i can tell you that absolutely EVERYONE in anyway connected with doing anything at all at the school HAS to be CRB checked before they are allowed to do it. This includes governors (who generally don’t come into contact directly with the children) through to mothers who might give a talk at a lunchtime to a small group of children.
Nobody is prepared to take the risk of any incident arising from a non CRB checked person doing anything to or with a child – and quite rightly too in my opinion.
We also tightly restrict access, by both parents and others, to the school grounds during school hours. In the past (thank God not with the school I’m involved with) people have accessed nearby school premises during school hours and been seen trying to ‘talk’ to children in the playground.
We had a case last summer of a single mum who took up with a ‘boyfriend’ who, by his behaviour near the school, caused other parents to report him both to the headteacher and to the Police. (He was seen trying to put his arm round and cuddle Year 4 girls as they left the school).
It turned out that he was a registered sex offender and had established a relationship with this woman so as to gain access both to her child and to other children through her.
So yes ‘parents’ can be dangerour to children as can their (sometimes casual or short term) ‘boyfriends / girlfriends. Allowing people onto school premises contravenes every safeguarding rule in the book.
All i meant was that CRB checks don’t prove someone is innocent, or “safe” to be around children. And if a local council is preventing parents looking after their own children and putting in CRB checked individuals because they are “safe” then they are wrong.
As others have said.. CRB checks only flag up people with previous convictions or history.
I think everyone dealing with vulnerable adults and children should be CRB checked, but there will always be people who abuse their positions, and CRB checking will not prevent that.
Vigilence is important, children and the vulnerable have a right to be protected, but generallyas people grow up they need to learn how to protect themselves.
Nope don’t know it
But, in the papers today was a story about the police paying a fortune to a medium to help them solve a murder. The psychic led them a merry dance insisting that the person had been force fed petrol etc and even gave them a name of the murderer. But.. it was a complete hoax. The person hadn’t even been murdered!
@forumhostpb wrote:
@jen_jen wrote:
A lot of the news recently has been about children and the internet, and as adults we like to think we wouldn’t be fooled, but it can happen to the best of us.
If I had only £1 for every time a female complained to me over the years about the ‘behaviour’ of some bloke she met via the internet………. !!!
Most times it is because the handsome hunk aged 25 or so turns out to be an overweight balding 50 year old; the tall ‘well hung’ prospective lover turns out to be 5’2” with a button mushroom; and most of all, the single guy who wants to develop a serious relationship etc turns out to be married with several kids and just wants a one night stand.
I never cease to be amazed at the sheer gullibility of internet users.
heh heh heh @ button mushroom
I was kind of expecting some of the blokes to come back with some harsh words about experiences with women they have met. Some men I know have been told the most outrageous lies by women. They have also had to change phone numbers and disappear to avoid bunny boiler types.
There are therefore nasty types of both sexes that use the net, and gullible people just waiting to be beguiled.
On the internet….nobody can hear you scream!!!!!!
:DAre you rolling your eyes at me?
pah…. whatever happened to lessy wednesday!
@pete wrote:
@kent f OBE wrote:
dont like pizza means you should have made moe of an effort and booked a table :roll:
doh silly me now you say it it makes sense :?
No, he was right the first time.. i don’t like pizza………they usually have cheese on them, and I don’t do dairy!
OK… so Watford have arranged for parents to be excluded from playgrounds and are hiring their own criminally checked people to supervise tots. They reckon its too dangerous to allow just anyone into playgrounds. So… we surmise from this that “everyone” is dangerous to children, including parents. *
Lets back up a little for a minute. There are dangers everywhere. Its not that long ago since the Moors murders. But, then there were no social networking sites…. no computers in fact, well there were, but every computer was the size of a football pitch. Let’s face it.. the only thing that has changed is that sexual predators have moved online and are “grooming” people from a distance. It has always gone on, there have always been sexual predators. Children have been told for decades not to accept sweets from strangers.
You have to educate your children. They have to know the dangers. And…. safety in numbers. I have drilled that into my daughter until i’m blue in the face. Always go out with friends and never come home alone. Never!
And.. I have been on my daughter’s facebook since she first signed up for it. The only reason I joined initially, just to keep an eye on her. Plus…. I have a lot of my friends children on mine too, and I keep a weather eye open for them as well. Its just sensible.
I feel terribly sad for this woman, my daughter is 17. I can understand her anger and the fact that people pretend to be people they are not. It is a standard internet response that you should expect everyone you talk to online to be lying. And a large percentage do…. if for no other reason than… they can.
*N.B. this is plainly ludicrous. For a start off, criminal checks don’t find most people who are dangerous to children as has been born out lately by the nursery nurse Vanessa George. She had been checked and had passed!
So.. erm…. Pizza is off then Pete?
Filth……..utter filth!!!!!
I am shocked.
:shock: :shock: :shock: :wink:
Well I have to admit to being terrified when I met you kenty!
:wink:
On a more serious note……………………..
oh c rap, i don’t seem to be able to do serious!
I’ll try again later :D
Seriously………….I typed a few things that most people would have hung drawn and quartered me for without realising I was just joking! :lol:
