Was what he did so terrible?

[Babbyy]

A friend is a member of a sports club.

He came across the profile of one of the women from the club on a dating site. Woman is married to a committee member from the club.

Friend was worried. Either she had been cloned or was behaving erratically. So, friend mentioned it to the safeguarding officer at the club. This is a woman who is best friends with dating profile woman, so he expected she'd be sympathetic to profile woman, have a quiet word and between them they'd do what needed doing (if anything) .

It turned out the profile was genuine and that the marriage had ended, although that was not public knowledge. No one was discreet about friend's "interfering" and he is now being vilified as a busy body, when all he was trying to do was make sure this woman wasn't vulnerable.

Possibly I'd have spoken to profile woman directly, but I understand why he felt it more comfortable to speak with her friend who happened to be responsible for safeguarding.

Just in case anyone thinks safeguarding is only about children, it's not. There are no child members at this club, but in line with its governing body, it still requires a safeguarding officer.

I think him claiming there was genuine concern for welfare or her being impersonated is a reach. He very easily could have spoken to her directly.

It sounds more like he jumped at the chance of having come across something gossip worthy, shared it with his friend at the club and it’s come back to bite him in the arse.

Well sounds like OP spread it around too and is certainly doing it now... I suspect that, assuming the story is true, OP might not be the bystander they claim to be.

If he was genuinely concerned her details had been cloned he should have spoken to her privately. Any other moral concerns are none of his business. It was a really weird route to take to go speak to the safeguarding person and I can see why people are suspicious of his motives.

I'm pretty appalled a safeguarding lead has disclosed who raised a concern though to make this public knowledge. I can't see how anyone would ever trust speaking to her again about something private.

That doesn’f come under safeguarding. Adults are allowed to be on dating sites even if married (morally not so much but that’s not the point)

A breakdown?! Married people on dating sites are cunts (unless separated), not mentally ill 😂

Either he thought she was seeking an affair or being cloned, neither of which is a safeguarding concern.

Tbh if I saw a married person on a dating site I wouldn’t stay quiet, but I also wouldn’t try to pass it off as some kind of faux naive concern for their mental health.

Fake concern about profile - awful person.

OP, what did the 'safe guarding' woman say when your friend asked her why she felt the need to give her friend your friend's name?

Safeguarding woman only needed to say to her friend 'hey Lindsay, why are you on this dating site?'

BUT, if these 2 ARE friends - why did safeguard woman not know why her friend was on the dating app - and therefore why the need to make all this drama for your friend?

How was there any sign the woman was vulnerable?

He went to a Safeguarding officer about a grown adult woman being on a dating site. He’s a nosy little shite.

Lol. No, he wasn't trying to make sure she wasn't vulnerable 😆

He's a gossip. Lots of men are. Oh well, life goes on.

Doesn't matter it's none of his business

No one was discreet about friend's "interfering" and he is now being vilified as a busy body, when all he was trying to do was make sure this woman wasn't vulnerable

Why would she be "vulnerable"? And what is the "safeguarding" issue. She's a grown adult and can on dating sites, married or not if she wants to.

The very mention of safeguarding in this context is ridiculous, even if she had put a strangely public dating profile up behind her husbands back.

At most he should have had a very private word with profile woman along the lines of her data being hacked.

Was she getting beaten up? Have i missed an update?

It was not well intentioned. Misguided but well intentioned would have been approaching the woman and telling her he was concerned her identity was being used fraudulently, not involving a third party. He had absolutely no evidence she was behaving "erratically" - her relationship could have been over (as was proven to be the case), or perhaps she was cheating on her husband... poor decisions don't necessarily constitute a safeguarding issue. What a knob.

Feck yes he's a busybody. The Safeguarding person!!!

She hasn't got one, she's single.

And so what if this was the case? The ‘predator’ would have realised it wasn’t her when he showed up for a date? What was she ‘vulnerable to’ exactly???

yes it’s all terrible just pure gossip and nosiness and pretending to be ‘concerned’

WTF are you all thinking??

He thinks she is having a breakdown because she was on a dating site? Isn’t that the biggest leap he could have taken?
If anything I would think someone on a dating site is resilient! It’s tough out there.

Exactly. What did he think the club’s safeguarding officer was going to do anyway? Being on a dating site is not an indication that anything is wrong. It’s none of their business either.

Hes not just a busy body, hes a judgy busy body. As a safeguarding lead I would have told him where to go.

He did this to create drama.

He had any genuine concerns about somebody else using her picture he would have spoken to her directly.

Her private life is her business and he had no right to talk about it with people at your club.

Safeguarding as a smokescreen for snooping and intrusion. Seems increasingly common.

And he would have been fine with that, having handed the concern to an appropriate person to decide if any action was needed.