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.
Actually it is my business if its my kids and a public school.
Why should anybody have to just take your word for it? What if the parent had been convicted of a sex crime? Should we just trust his wife that he was "railroaded"?
Actually, in Los Angeles, MANY people would consider it "railroaded" if it was an LAPD arrest.
I know people who have felonies on their records from protesting. War. Nuclear weapons. Nuclear power plants. Farmworker's rights. I've got NO problem with that particular felon in a classroom. None. Parents weren't background checked when my kids were in school but I'd assume MANY of them had a pot arrest or an arrest/conviction for protesting the Vietnam war. There would have been no volunteers if there had been screening of everyone who was awake in the 60's and 70's.
I think it's a matter of values. I'd rather have a parent who was arrested protesting a war chaperoning my child on a field trip than one who stopped at his girlfriend's house for a perfectly legal quickie on the way home to the wife and kids.
Last edited by DewDropInn; 07-20-2013 at 07:30 PM..
Actually it is my business if its my kids and a public school.
Why should anybody have to just take your word for it? What if the parent had been convicted of a sex crime? Should we just trust his wife that he was "railroaded"?
You don't have to take my word for it. But that makes this a completely useless conversation if you just think I'm lying. My point still stands, however, and other people read this forum apart from you.
My take on it is that if its in the past and the person has done their due penance, then I'm not going to prevent them reading a story to some kindergartners.
If a crime is actually relevant to he well being of a child, like a sex crime, then they'll be on a sex offender's list and already prohibited from being within a certain distance of a school.
The fact that somebody has a record is none of my business, and quite frankly if a parent, felon or no, wants to help out at their child's school then I see no actual good reason to stop them. I just don't see what you're trying to prevent. It's unlikely that someone is going to take your kid out of class and go on a bank robbing spree with them, but they might do a fabulous rendition of Red Fish Blue Fish.
Perhaps your husband should run for mayor or comptroller of NYC Finster. I'm sure either of those two lowlifes would be welcome to read in their children's schools.
Perhaps your husband should run for mayor or comptroller of NYC Finster. I'm sure either of those two lowlifes would be welcome to read in their children's schools.
Well that's the thing exactly, isn't it? I'm sure background checks make people feel better, but in the end do they really do anything useful? Actual child molesters are often upstanding members of the community that would pass a criminal check with flying colors.
And it prevents people from coming forward to help in the very communities that need them most.
Actually, in Los Angeles, MANY people would consider it "railroaded" if it was an LAPD arrest.
Agreed, but this was prosecuted, not just arrested.
Quote:
I know people who have felonies on their records from protesting. War. Nuclear weapons. Nuclear power plants. Farmworker's rights. I've got NO problem with that particular felon in a classroom. None. Parents weren't background checked when my kids were in school but I'd assume MANY of them had a pot arrest or an arrest/conviction for protesting the Vietnam war. There would have been no volunteers if there had been screening of everyone who was awake in the 60's and 70's.
That is your right as a parent to let you children hang out with felons. The school does not have the right to choose for all parents which felons can or cannot volunteer in school.
As for protesting, I suspect, this notion that the majority of felons in this country are peace loving, pocketknife welding rays of sunshine is bogus.
Quote:
I think it's a matter of values. I'd rather have a parent who was arrested protesting a war chaperoning my child on a field trip than one who stopped at his girlfriend's house for a perfectly legal quickie on the way home to the wife and kids.
OK, so all the felons who want to volunteer in class and have failed the background check can have their entire criminal record disseminated to the parents at the beginning of the school year, then parents can choose who can or cannot volunteer, then the parents can sign off on any legal responsibility to the school, and then the felons can come volunteer. Those parents who do not want their children in a classroom with a convicted felon can have separate classrooms, or wait are you saying parents have no right to protest felons placement in the classroom?
My take on it is that if its in the past and the person has done their due penance, then I'm not going to prevent them reading a story to some kindergartners.
If a crime is actually relevant to he well being of a child, like a sex crime, then they'll be on a sex offender's list and already prohibited from being within a certain distance of a school.
LOL! I knew this was only about your husband. The reality is rapists have a specific age group they target. So if Mr. X only raped older women than using YOUR reasoning he should be allowed to read to kindergartners.
What if his wife said he was railroaded and didn't actually rape anyone "per se"?
LOL! I knew this was only about your husband. The reality is rapists have a specific age group they target. So if Mr. X only raped older women than using YOUR reasoning he should be allowed to read to kindergartners.
What if his wife said he was railroaded and didn't actually rape anyone "per se"?
Please answer the question this time.
What I said above has nothing to do with my husband. I already established, quite a few posts ago, that sex offenders are on a registry and are not allowed in schools.
Quote:
Megan's Law, in the U.S., is designed to sanction sex offenders and reduce their recidivism rate. The law is enacted and enforced on a state-by-state basis. Most states also restrict where convicted sex offenders can live after their release, prohibiting residency within a designated distance of schools and daycare centers (usually 1,000–2,000 feet (300–610 m)). Guided by the 2007 Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, sex offenders must avoid of such areas as schools, bus stops, gyms, recreation centers, playgrounds, parks, swimming pools, libraries, nursing homes, and places of worship by 500 to 2,500 feet (150 to 760 m).
This applies to all sex offenders, regardless of the offence, as far as I can ascertain. Local laws probably vary a bit.
So not only will they not be volunteering, they won't be picking up or dropping off, either.
Background checks sound like a good idea, but someone either has to vet them and decide yea or nay, or it's a simple yes/no. If it's a no then people like Bill Gates, Stephen Fry, and Martha Stewart would be unwelcome. My husband and I had our names on a "blacklist" in the old South Africa for our activism against Apartheid, I guess that means I can't be trusted around children.
Background checks sound like a good idea, but someone either has to vet them and decide yea or nay, or it's a simple yes/no. If it's a no then people like Bill Gates, Stephen Fry, and Martha Stewart would be unwelcome. My husband and I had our names on a "blacklist" in the old South Africa for our activism against Apartheid, I guess that means I can't be trusted around children.
It IS all relative.
Exactly! This is my issue with this, and all things zero tolerance - they often hurt more than they help. Things are rarely black and white. ETA - absolutely no pun intended.
I think it depends on the district rules. I actually worked as a paid employee at my dd's school as a breakfast/lunchroom aide, so I had to undergo the same screening and background checks as any other employee. And I know that another aide I worked with had a DUI...she actually told me while she was waiting for her ride that her license had been revoked (or suspended, don't remember) and she had a DUI conviction that was years old. She also happened to be a great worker and wonderful with kids. So I guess it depends on the type of offense, how long ago, and it's relevance. Any kind of violent crime, crime against children, or anything recent I would hope cancel anyone off the volunteering list in any district. But something that someone did as a teen or young adult that has no bearing on the kind of adult they became shouldn't make any difference. Even on regular job applications, they only ask about convictions within the last 5-7 years.
Like anything else, background checks should be used with discretion and as a tool...not as the whole safety net. Too many people rely on a single tool instead of their own common sense. No, I don't want a "felon" working with my kid, if that felon is a mass murderer or a child molester, or someone with assaults and domestic violence on his record. If the so called "felon" carried a switchblade (not killed anyone, not cut anyone, CARRIED one) as a teenager, what's that got to do with me or my child? I understand school's need to protect the kids, and themselves, but I feel it goes overboard in a lot of instances.
Last edited by Jaded; 07-20-2013 at 11:31 PM..
Reason: copied from original thread; deleted response to OP for that thread
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.
