Talk

Advanced search

Why does OFSTED only require regular helpers to have a CRB but not an adhoc helper???

(3 Posts)
stocks81979 Sun 25-Sep-11 10:03:37

Under the current OFSTED safeguarding children act parent helpers in schools and nurseries must only have the normal checks carried such as a CRB if they are a regular helper. Adhoc helpers can be excused from this process. Both are "supervised". Parent helpers stretch to step parents grandparents in fact anyone that wants to volunteer.

My argument is introducing a child to a stranger in a trusted environment like school means that to the child that person is no longer a stranger and therefore they become a trusted adult to the child in and out of school. Whilst in school they are supervised outside of school they may not be. How do we explain to our children you can't trust that adult out of school because they aren't supervised. In fact how would we know which parent helper has had the checks.

It is unfair we are put in this position. I know CRBs only show what someone has been convicted of but this piece of legislation is allowing the possibility of a convicted adult working with our children in our schools and nurseries.

I would like to call that we enforce the official child protection checks on ALL helpers adhoc or regular, supervised or unsupervised and commence this immediately this is after all why we have these checks and why we enforce them in all other circumstances.

cookielove Sun 25-Sep-11 16:25:15

I don't agree with you, parent helpers and others will be completely supervised while in schools so there for not needing crbs also as i imagine several each term/year will pass through this could get very expensive for the school if they are expected to pay for it, or they may get less parents if they are asking the parents to pay as i believe it is over £100, its been a while since i had one done.

Isn't it up to the parents to decide who can be trusted outside of school?

HoneyPablo Mon 26-Sep-11 07:46:02

I disagree. CRB checks mean nothing. Helpers are supervised and should never have unsupervised access to children. Therefore sfaeguarding children is everybody's responsibility. Relying on a CRB check would give a false sense of security as a CRB only checks for past convictions and is not an indicator of a person's liklihood of being a danger to children.
Stranger danger is very much a myth as most children who are abused are abused by family members or people who have unsupervised access to them (and therefore a CRB)
I remember a very sad case about a 2 year old who managed to get out of her nursery and was found drowned in a pond. The police inquiry subsequently found that a man had seen the little girl wandering alone but had done nothing because he was frightened of being called a paedophile if he approached her. So he did nothing.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now