BBC reports that Criminal record checks have not been carried out on tens of thousands of NHS staff, including those working with children and vulnerable adults.
This seems to wory people. Why should every person in some official contact with children be so checked unless it is that everyone is now a paedophile until they prove otherwise? Presumption of paedophilia has replaced a legal presumption of innocence. I refuse to undergo such a check. It is bad enough having to prove to a bank that I am not a money launderer. When I first opened a current account my father took me to the manager and I was issued with a cheque book. There was trust. Now there is nothing but distrustful bureaucracy.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Enhanced CRB is worthless in that it clears someone for previous offences but if they offend when in post how wouldyou know unless they were caught?
However Enhanced CRNB is useful if someone is in charge of say money and have a fraud conviction in the past it is useful to know. I feel strongly that CRB is useful as you need some way of knowing f someone has committed a serious offence in relation to contact with vulnerable people.
An example-I had a friend who was sexualy abused by a nurse-he was convicted -he now cannot get a nursing job-however what he has done is set up a nursing agency to get round it -but he has een stripped of his nursing regstration as the offence was serious. You would want to know about nasty men like him. It is not just about paedophiles. This is about protecting vulnerable adults.
Every locality now has a not obnly child protection policy but vulnerable adults protection policy fr this very reason.
It is sad that this is what it has come to but those who are abusive in a trusted position looking after vulnerable people need to know there is a system out there to protect people.
In the same way you would not put your mum in a nursing omem which was run by someone more interested in income than the welfare- by ensuring the wekfare needs are being met it ensures that the older people are not neglected in a minimum way-poor example but making a point about how the vulnerable side of society is at risk of abuse and neglect.
While you make good points I still object that someone known all their life as of good character, say withina local church, should require a criminal check before they may be left alone with children. It is a sick society which has no trust at all.
Graham I agree but a long term church goer is no guarantee-example-look at the number of priests and respected teachers who have been found out to be paedophiles.No community is safe. It happened in the Orthodox Jewish Community. Two well respected business men in Stamford Hill. yet you would have thought these men had more interest in their scriptures than abuse.
You could be an unfound out substance misuser-what would use a CRB check be? I have abused coproxamol in the past (not now) yet I would be Enhanced CRB cleared to work in a pharmacy!
My point being -in life you can never assume anything-especially when it comes to safety. Portugal being a latest example.However that is another kettle of fish......
Another kettle of fish is whether if someone did something in the past it excludes them from the present. Abuse of a drug years ago would be no bar to work with a considerate pharmacist, IMO.
But back to church. In the past 20 years we have had one self-confessed sex offender attend our church with no untoward effects. There have been three other accusations which involved the police and male church members but nothing came to court. In one case we believe there was a malicious accusation but the man concerned went through much trauma until the case was droppred. I understand his arrest remains on the record. BTW, none of these accusations were against church leaders but they are the worst cases with which one has to deal and the accused certainly do not believe there is any presumption of innocence on the part of the police.
I would happilly come and help you out on a busy day for no cost to gain experience.
WE could discuss such an interesting an highly emotive and political issue for a long time. Wat I would like to say though is that sex offender should be offerred the specialistcare and treatment they need to get back into society and be safe. However as resources are ploughed into thinking about more prison cells instead of more rehabilittation and treatment that we know works (Grendon prison being a shining example of sterling work-70% who complete the Grendon program do not reoffend. 70% who go to normal prison do reoffend).
However I am aware it is off topic. So may not be appropriate for this blog.
The prison authorites have indeed not been supportive of programmes which rehabilitate. IIRC Prison Fellowship had an initiative which was closed by Dartmoor. Among those opposing it was the Chaplain General :-(
Post a Comment