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.
I'm sorry. In my opinion feeling a background check is needed for everyone your child might possibly pass in the hallway is not going to stop anything. At some point, if a child is old enough to be walking to the restroom by themselves, he should be aware of how to make a scene if anyone is pulling them somewhere they don't want to be. At this age, they are presumably using public restrooms without mom or dad if the need arises. I truly understand wanting to protect your child against every possible thing. Especially as a very new parent. Really I do. But the truth is you can't. And it's a difficult thing for us parents to accept sometimes. Sometimes the act of overprotecting becomes a bigger (although different) risk than that which we seek to protect from..but that's another issue.
Anyway, we're going to have to agree to disagree.
You are downplaying the access a school volunteer has to children. Here, chaperones are frequently "alone" with students on field trips due to the fact they split up into small groups, usually 5 or 6 kids and a chaperone. Chaperones are told not to leave where ever the field trip is but two years ago a parent on a trip to the Met took 6 kids out of the school and ran around NYC with them for a few hours. Nothing happened beyond the kids missing the museum, being two hours late back to the bus, and making everyone late back to school. But it was this incident that changed the district policy so that now all parent chaperones have to pass background checks as well as classroom volunteers.
I have no idea if that would have prevented this incident, but being fingerprinted in all likelihood makes some parents take their responsibilities as chaperones a little more seriously.
Odd analogy. I would hope an "if it did" would never happen in the first place.
I'm talking about a mean parent not a sexual pervert. The point is that teachers should be aware of what is happening in their classroom. I have a friend that works at a school where in order to observe your child's class or eat lunch with them you have to pass a background check first. That is just silly - and unnecessary. I never worked at one that bad but I wouldn't be surprised for that to become more common.
Wow. You'll go to extremes to prove a point won't you?
How do you feel about misdemeanors?
I thought I was clear that our policy is felons. If it was misdemeanors related to children, then those too.
Quote:
What about the child molesters who have molested for decades, continue to molest, and have never been caught?
What about them? Are you expecting me to say I think they would be good volunteers? Don't be ridiculous.
And AGAIN, this is not the only safety measure a school should take. It is just one tool to protect kids. And there is no reason to have felons volunteering in schools.
Quote:
What about the respectable volunteer who dons a suit and tie Monday - Friday but smokes weed on the weekend like another one has a beer?
If he is felon, or has a drug conviction of any kind, he does not belong in a classroom.
Quote:
What about a person who's visiting the state with a legal item in his pocket, but finds out later that the item is illegal in the state he's visiting?
What about...what about...what about...
OMG talk about being ridiculous. Why does the school have to sift through records at all? If you don't pass the background check, then you volunteer somewhere besides the classroom. Easy.
Quote:
I spent many years volunteering and working at my kids' school. I was background checked and finger printed at my own expense. I have no issue with background checks (in fact I think they're good) but I think a little common sense should be applied.
Yes, and common sense tells the vast majority of people that FELONS shouldn't be in classrooms.
Quote:
When you do something that's considered a felony, then yes, you've blown it, but when it's a misdemeanor drug charge decades ago because you went through a "stupid a$$" phase in your youth, maybe you'd have something to offer a middle school kid who's fascinated with drugs and considering their use. It's sad that we slam the door on people who may be able to reach kids who otherwise are unreachable just because we want to blanket all situations instead of looking at individual ones.
If you want to become a drug counselor than follow the procedures to become one, do not use classroom volunteerism as a chance to counsel students when you have no business being there.
Quote:
As an aside: I volunteered right along side people I knew were creeps because I work in a place where I'm privy to information about many of the "fine, upstanding citizens" who happen to also be spouse beaters, closet pill heads, or other issues with substance abuse. Those are the ones who bothered me most. At least with a misdemeanor conviction on a background check I know what they were charged with.
Well as a mandated reporter, I would be obligated to make sure that those who are a potential danger to children, where not in a position of authority over my students. Meaning if I had knowledge that so-and-so has a substance abuse problem, I would discuss with my principal my concerns about whether or not they should be chaperoning trips.
The point is that teachers should be aware of what is happening in their classroom.
And the point those of us who are teachers are trying to make is that although teachers work very hard to be aware of what is going on in the classroom, it is impossible to have a pair of human eyes on every single inch of a 20x15 foot classroom at the same time. Especially if you are expected to occasionally, oh, I dunno, bend over and spend five seconds actually helping a child with a problem they are struggling with.
Yes, it is an "inconvenience" to parents to have to be checked. Absolutely. And I'm sure most of them look at it like you do, that they're being eyed unfairly, but the point is, you are not the ones they are trying to dissuade from using the school to gain access to kids. They're trying to dissuade people who do intend to do harm and there's no way to "see" intent just by looking at someone. Checking adults who come into contact with the kids not only helps lower the chances something unthinkable will happen, but serves as a deterrent from anyone trying it.
And the point those of us who are teachers are trying to make is that although teachers work very hard to be aware of what is going on in the classroom, it is impossible to have a pair of human eyes on every single inch of a 20x15 foot classroom at the same time. Especially if you are expected to occasionally, oh, I dunno, bend over and spend five seconds actually helping a child with a problem they are struggling with.
Yes, it is an "inconvenience" to parents to have to be checked. Absolutely. And I'm sure most of them look at it like you do, that they're being eyed unfairly, but the point is, you are not the ones they are trying to dissuade from using the school to gain access to kids. They're trying to dissuade people who do intend to do harm and there's no way to "see" intent just by looking at someone. Checking adults who come into contact with the kids not only helps lower the chances something unthinkable will happen, but serves as a deterrent from anyone trying it.
I am a teacher, been one for over twenty years. Teachers should be aware of what is going on in their classroom.
I am a teacher, been one for over twenty years. Teachers should be aware of what is going on in their classroom.
And what about chaperoning? Classroom volunteers frequently are utilized as chaperones, and by middle schools (or maybe before) that can means small groups of kids supervised by a parent. How are teachers supposed to be aware of what is going on there?
I am a teacher, been one for over twenty years. Teachers should be aware of what is going on in their classroom.
"Aware" is a moving target. I think every teacher tries to be "aware" to whatever extent they can. But at some point, one pair of eyes can only see so many spots in the room at once and if you stand there like a hawk and never get to a place where you can actually work with and interact with the kids, you're not really teaching. Allowing someone who may have a background of abusing children to have access by not providing any sort of check allows the few seconds of opportunity needed for them to slip out to take a call, then gain access to a child in the hallway.
Nothing will be perfect. But we must take every reasonable measure to make sure people who gain access to kids when their parents aren't around have been screened.
And what about chaperoning? Classroom volunteers frequently are utilized as chaperones, and by middle schools (or maybe before) that can means small groups of kids supervised by a parent. How are teachers supposed to be aware of what is going on there?
Absolutely, they should have background checks for a trip but they don't need them to read a book in a classroom or copy papers for the school secretary.
Absolutely, they should have background checks for a trip but they don't need them to read a book in a classroom or copy papers for the school secretary.
It is easier for the school (and thus safer) if all volunteers who come into contact with kids are held to the same standard. There is nothing wrong with making sure felons are not in the classroom.
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.
Really I do. But the truth is you can't. And it's a difficult thing for us parents to accept sometimes. Sometimes the act of overprotecting becomes a bigger (although different) risk than that which we seek to protect from..but that's another issue. 
