DBS and soft play

I would have the same issues with a convicted sex offender working at a soft play centre as i would have if one was serving me at tescos. I would absolutely hate it.

The question is, would my child be at any greater risk? I wouldnt let my child out of my sight so in both scenarios the risk would be identical.

Exactly, everyone goes on about stranger danger, but the biggest danger is from parents/carers, not necessarily because they're actively hurting their child, but because they're neglecting them.
The biggest risk to younger children at soft plays often seems to be older children who are not being properly supervised, and they can't have DBS checks. Or it can be parents threatening other parents (or their kids) when you ask them to get off their phone and watch their 8 year old who is trying to throw the little ones out of the baby area.
I know it's not the staff's job to intervene, and they're the least of the risks in any soft play I've ever been in.

Pre-employment checks on convictions would also weed it out.

It's an interesting one because you're right that although most people don't want DBS checks for softplay staff, the very vast majority would avoid one that had a sex offender working there. I suppose it's about judging risk.

Most people aren't too keen on the idea of convicted sex offenders working anywhere. I'm not surprised that a soft play with a publicised sex offender working there had to close, but I reckon the same would also be true if it were a grocers or accountant firm.

I know intellectually that they have to go somewhere and that, based on the prevalence of paedos across the population, it's overwhelmingly likely I've come across at least hundreds of them in daily life over the years. I'm also not silly enough to think the convicted ones are less a threat than the undiscovered. Yet there's still that instinctive feeling of revulsion.

But what you're actually asking is whether people want something that may make staffing more difficult (delays and turnover) and increased prices, with a potential impact on viability, in a service a lot of us use and that it's far from clear would make either the service or wider society any more safe.

Actually, there are a lot of roles where a paedo could be a much greater threat to my DC than doing door and coffees at a place we frequent, with no interaction. If a convicted sex offender is working in my area, that may be one of the less bad permutations. I appreciate that might not be the case if eg your kid is at a regular craft class in soft play and building relationships.

I’m genuinely curious. Soft play in a town near me has a convicted sex offender working there recently. Parents voted with their feet and place never reopened once the public knew.

Pretty sure anyone would have issue with a convicted paedophile working as a postman, in a corner shop or anywhere really.

It doesn't mean we have issues with staff not having DBS when they work in the ice-cream van, sweet shop or the McDonalds opposite the schools, and serving unaccompanied children (which are alone from year 4 or year 5)

not because we don't care, but because it's not realistic. Frankly, I would be a lot more wary of predators around children who have no adult than in a soft play where kids are too young to be left alone and as safe as can be.

The thing is that sex offenders have to work somewhere. The argument seems to be that the risks involved in them working at softplay are no greater than the risks involved with them working at Tesco/in a cafe/being a bus driver and therefore it would be pointless to DBS check softplay staff unless you're going to DBS check everyone who works in a public facing role.

Personally, I think the risks of them working in softplay centres is greater than the risk of them working in Tesco/cafe/driving a bus, but still low enough that I don't require them to have a DBS.

Unless you've asked about DBS checks at every softplay you've used then you don't care that much either!

That’s what I thought but most posters didn’t seem to have an issue with no DBS certificates which would weed out the convicted. Just curious!

Most people would take issue with a convicted sex offender working anywhere. No-one wants to be in close proximity to a sex offender, for quite obvious reasons.

So as the majority of posters don’t have an issue with staff not having DBS certificates as they have limited access to children in their opinion, would they have no issue with a convicted sex offender working in a soft play?

YABU - Staff at a soft play have no responsibility for supervising children. That’s your job as the parent.

I remember a thread on here were OP was proud of her DS getting job in an Amazon warehouse. He had to have a enhanced DBS, which makes no sense to me.

That’s good to know @NuffSaidSam

They don't need one. They are not providing care or responsible for the children, any more than the staff in Tesco are. That's your job to supervise your child.

You don't need a dbs unless you are caring for the children. Otherwise anyone who comes into contact with them would need one which would be shops, bus drivers, god knows what else.

Agree.

I don't think they need DBS checks anyway. But I do think people drawing equivalences with supermarket staff or cafe staff are potentially not aware of how much contact some softplay staff have with children. I would assume the person who started this petition, the OP and other concerned parties have been to similar softplay centres to me, where it would be insane to suggest that it's equivalent to working at Asda!

It's not safe to say that on a national level soft play staff as a cohort have more contact, because actually we have no idea how to verify that. Better to stick to what is actually known, ie that there are some soft play staff who surely have more contact with children than any supermarket worker would. It might make more sense for those with safeguarding concerns to focus on those roles.

Disagree. That would most jobs would need a dbs, shop staff etc

You're of course right that it depends on the individual softplay.

I've (luckily) never been to a softplay where the staff are so hands-off. I can only comment from my own experience.

But I don't think there are ANY supermarkets where the staff would be expected to interact with children in the way that the staff at SOME softplay centres are. So on a national level, I think it's safe to say that softplay staff have more contact and more opportunities to take advantage of that contact with children than supermarket staff do.

I assume that the OP has been to similar style softplay places as I have.

I think it's foolish to think that softplay staff are having the same level of contact with children as other parents (or supermarket staff as some people have said).

Acknowledging that there's evidently some variation in what soft play staff do, it's pretty foolish to dismiss the idea out of hand.

The fact is that there'll be some supermarket staff who have just as much contact or more as some soft play staff. A parent with their toddler may very well spend more time loading their shopping at a staffed Tesco till than they do paying into the soft play. A child at soft play may never interact at all with a staff member whose only job is in the kitchen- one I used to go to had a dedicated chef. Levels of contact evidently vary.

They're not supervising or alone with children so I guess that's why. I mean it could mean that any cafe or location where a parent with children comes in would need to dbs their staff.

But yeah I think it is responsible and good business practice for soft plays to do them.

I'm not saying it would be impossible for another parent to abuse a child at softplay. But I do think it's significantly less likely than a member of staff doing so. In the picture you paint, I'd have to be not watching my child for an extensive period of time for this to happen. I wouldn't allow my child to chat extensively to another parent. I (and I think most parents) would be more at ease with my child talking to a member of staff who is in charge of the softplay/running an arts and craft class.

I didn't realise the softplay places in my area (West London if you're interested!) were so unusual. It's not just our most used one that is like this, they pretty much all have staff on hand supervising (not supervising the children as such, but regulating turns/safety on the drop slide/go karts/zip line). Two of our other local ones have a 'character' associated with them and they will come out and meet the kids periodically, this is obviously a member of staff in a suit. The children will approach them/hug them etc. so again contact that another parent wouldn't have. One had a member of staff playing Santa this year and again, children sitting on his lap etc.

I don't think DBS is necessary, but I think it's foolish to think that softplay staff are having the same level of contact with children as other parents (or supermarket staff as some people have said).

DBS doesn’t mean no criminal convictions anyway. It would catch people banned from working with children (assuming softplay would count as a regulated activity, which I’m not sure about) , but other than that it’s up to the employer what they are comfortable with.