Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Less than 8% of americans are convicted felons who would be disallowed from volunteering in schools. Not going to make a difference in the number of volunteers. I would also like to point out that the TEACHERS in this thread have not stated that there is an overwhelming lack of classroom volunteers/chaperones. In fact they have said quite the opposite.
My school does not desperately need volunteers. There is no redirecting of funds associated with background checks.
The fallacy of pretending that anyone here has stated that background checks are the end all be all of protecting students is ridiculous. Background checks are a simple idea, that no one claims are perfect, but are a step in the right direction.
Well, I guess as long as it doesn't affect your school and your wealthy parents can afford to pay for the background checks, it's all good. The rest of the great unwashed can just deal with it.
NO particulars have been shared. But a heck of a lot of conclusions have been jumped to.
This wide-spread, all-inclusive, felon fear would also keep Martha Stewart from volunteering in a classroom. And an 83 year old nun named Sister Megan Rice. Congratulations, America. Your felon hangup is keeping America's children safe from the Martha's home-baked three-cheese bread.
So be it. Sometimes, the safety of the masses means you are inconvenienced or you miss out on things that are never going to happen anyway (Martha Stewart is not coming to school as a classroom volunteer, just for a teensy bit of reality). It is one of the great dilemmas of our age, the balance between safety and freedom. But the PUBLIC SCHOOL must err on the side of safety. They do this over and over and over again, and classroom volunteers are the smallest piece of this.
PARENTS otoh, have the ability to make their own individual choices when it comes to safety vs. opportunity. So go ahead, if you think Martha Stewart is a good role model (and I do not, I think she and her broker are sleaze balls) take your child to meet her and eat her bread but I for one am glad a woman who broke the law to save a few bucks when she was already a millionare is no one I want around my kid.
As for Megan Rice, I applaud her intentions, and completely and utterly condemn her actions. Breaking into a nuclear production facility is not ok. OTOH, if the consequences of her actions are that she cannot read a book in class, I think she would be OK with that. And again, if you as a parent, choose to take your children to learn from her, that is absolutely your prerogative as a parent. What is not the schools prerogative is to pick and choose which felons are allowed in the classroom. They do not have the expertise, or access to records to make those sorts of decisions for children in their care.
Well, I guess as long as it doesn't affect your school and your wealthy parents can afford to pay for the background checks, it's all good. The rest of the great unwashed can just deal with it.
The great irony is, that the self same people who are all for felons being allowed in the class room are the very same ones who blame the schools first when things go wrong. Blaming the schools for erring on the side of caution is literally, laughable.
Lkb0714 is far scarier to me than Mr. FinsterRufus...
Legitimate, documented child abusers/offenders are not allowed near schools in the first place. The background check requirement for all volunteers is worse than useless - it causes real harm by misdirecting funds that could be better used toward education, by restricting the number of available volunteers in schools which desperately need them, by asserting that parents are unwelcome at the school their own children attend and which they are paying for without first undergoing an odious invasion of privacy. The only beneficiaries of these stupid, yes stupid, policies are the companies which market and sell the obligatory training courses and background checks while the children lose.
From another standpoint, DH is an attorney and we understand too well how unevenly the 'law' is applied, not to mention that such policies imply that one's punishment will never end. And really, would any of us want George Zimmerman or Casey Anthony volunteering in our classrooms? They were acquitted after all... Squeaky clean!
Yes, thank you, you absolutely get it.
Not everyone lives in a world where the school district is overrun by volunteers. And there are neighborhoods here where parents would never voluntarily walk into a police station and hand over their fingerprints, given the history of resident/police relations there. Regardless of whether they have a record or not. Unfortunate, but true - and not completely unjustified.
Considering that the Philadelphia public schools have lost all staff this coming school year that are not either a teacher or a principal, it's damn near catastrophic. There are no lunch aides, no councelor, no recess aides, no extracurricular activities - apart from what the parents pay for raised by the PTA. The worst part is, no secretaries.
The last meeting we had with the principal was whether she'll be able to open the doors at all in September. The subject of staffing those positions with volunteer parents came up, but it's a lot to ask already strapped parents and it'll give the school district an excuse to never fund those positions again. But she can't be everywhere at once.
Ours is one of the high performing public schools because of the parental involvement. The struggling schools need more parents, not less. Fingerprint background checks are a horrible idea for this district.
The great irony is, that the self same people who are all for felons being allowed in the class room are the very same ones who blame the schools first when things go wrong. Blaming the schools for erring on the side of caution is literally, laughable.
Please. No one here is advocating that people who have documented reasons they should not be around children are put in charge of supervising overnight field trips. What is being said is that certain past mistakes are less of an issue than others, and certain types of volunteering are less risky than others. Some schools (although clearly not the affluent schools and parents you brush elbows with) are desperate for help. They are short staffed and underbudgeted. Their parents cannot afford to write a check to cover full criminal background checks. They may be fearful of who sees and how far it goes back. Youthful indescretions and even some poor judgement as an adult should not necessarily prohibit one from future good deeds. It's a sad day when a parent fears he or she cannot spend time helping in their childs classroom in a supervised situation, when the school is desperate and the parent is willing and able. Who loses? The kids.
ETA It also is worth noting that less affluent parents are less likely to have the means to pay top lawyers to fight questionable charges.
Last edited by toobusytoday; 07-21-2013 at 09:54 PM..
And the people we are talking about ARE PARENTS. Parents of children in the school. I don't know what on earth it is that a parent of a child that goes to that school volunteering in a classroom is going to do to a child in that classroom.
It's very sad, but abuse happens everywhere. Rich communities, poor communities... child molesters have children too. I was quite shocked and saddened, my first few years teaching, discovering how prevalent it was.
The vast majority of parents are wonderful. Absolutely wonderful. But some aren't. Background checks and screening are imperfect, but are trying to reduce the likelihood that someone who intends to do harm will be able to get to a kid.
And I'm not trying to imply that your husband is some horrible person because of a bogus charge from 20 years ago. I'm really not. I'm just saying that the school has an uphill battle trying to balance the need for volunteers and access for parents with keeping kids safe. If a few people get excluded who weren't a threat at all, but some who were a threat were kept out, would those parents who had to find a different way to volunteer really want the genuine threats allowed near their kids? They can't cherry pick.
It's very sad, but abuse happens everywhere. Rich communities, poor communities... child molesters have children too. I was quite shocked and saddened, my first few years teaching, discovering how prevalent it was.
The vast majority of parents are wonderful. Absolutely wonderful. But some aren't. Background checks and screening are imperfect, but are trying to reduce the likelihood that someone who intends to do harm will be able to get to a kid.
And I'm not trying to imply that your husband is some horrible person because of a bogus charge from 20 years ago. I'm really not. I'm just saying that the school has an uphill battle trying to balance the need for volunteers and access for parents with keeping kids safe. If a few people get excluded who weren't a threat at all, but some who were a threat were kept out, would those parents who had to find a different way to volunteer really want the genuine threats allowed near their kids? They can't cherry pick.
It's a tough issue with no perfect solutions.
No, I absolutely understand what you're saying. It is tough. Nobody wants to put children in danger, I totally get that. I will disagree that you can't cherry pick, I think you probably can and in some districts they do - but I have no problem with where you stand.
I appreciate your compassion and empathy, in all sincerity.
Please. No one here is advocating that people who have documented reasons they should not be around children are put in charge of supervising overnight field trips. What is being said (and I have no doubt you clearly understand but your "must be right at all costs" glasses are in the way) is that certain past mistakes are less of an issue than others, and certain types of volunteering are less risky than others. Some schools (although clearly not the affluent schools and parents you brush elbows with) are desparate for help. They are short staffed and underbudgeted. Their parents cannot afford to write a check to cover full criminal background checks. They may be fearful of who sees and how far it goes back. Youthful indescresions and even some poor judgement as an adult should not necessarily prohibit one from future good deeds. It's a sad day when a parent fears he or she cannot spend time helping in their childs classroom in a supervised situation, when the school is desparate and the parent is willing and able. Who loses? The kids.
There are not enough reps in the universe. Awesome.
Please. No one here is advocating that people who have documented reasons they should not be around children are put in charge of supervising overnight field trips. What is being said (and I have no doubt you clearly understand but your "must be right at all costs" glasses are in the way) is that certain past mistakes are less of an issue than others, and certain types of volunteering are less risky than others. Some schools (although clearly not the affluent schools and parents you brush elbows with) are desparate for help. They are short staffed and underbudgeted. Their parents cannot afford to write a check to cover full criminal background checks. They may be fearful of who sees and how far it goes back. Youthful indescresions and even some poor judgement as an adult should not necessarily prohibit one from future good deeds. It's a sad day when a parent fears he or she cannot spend time helping in their childs classroom in a supervised situation, when the school is desparate and the parent is willing and able. Who loses? The kids.
All the way around they lose. Because that just means if something unfortunate does happen due to a classroom volunteer/chaperone, it will be to those same kids.
As for the fingerprinting it is 54.50 in my state and that receipt can be used for five years (I just checked their website). They only include adult information so teenage problems are not included. And if you don't want a background check take your kid to the zoo yourself or volunteer elsewhere in the school. No one has yet explained why it is necessary that the 8% of Americans who are felons must be allowed access to other people's children. Care to try?
The reality is you are expecting the schools to pick and choose who can volunteer. That isn't oing to happen, they lack the legal expertise and information available. The only thing that will happen is there will be zero safety checks on any volunteers. That is a losing situation as well.
All the way around they lose. Because that just means if something unfortunate does happen due to a classroom volunteer/chaperone, it will be to those same kids.
As for the fingerprinting it is 54.50 in my state and that receipt can be used for five years (I just checked their website). They only include adult information so teenage problems are not included. And if you don't want a background check take your kid to the zoo yourself or volunteer elsewhere in the school. No one has yet explained why it is necessary that the 8% of Americans who are felons must be allowed access to other people's children. Care to try?
The reality is you are expecting the schools to pick and choose who can volunteer. That isn't oing to happen, they lack the legal expertise and information available. The only thing that will happen is there will be zero safety checks on any volunteers. That is a losing situation as well.
I have no idea why you are so focused on chaperoning field trips to the zoo. I clearly stated in school, supervised situations which may or may not even directly involve children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
