To think a DBS check is not 100% guarantee?

[PurplePenguins]

Just a general discussion between 4 of us. All of us have children but I work with vulnerable children (which maybe clouding my judgement) while the other three are office bods. I agree with DBS checks, they prevent those convicted of offences such as child abuse, violence and fraud working with vulnerable people. I have had numerous DBS checks over the course of my career, but I feel there is always a chance that someone unsuitable could get through as they have never been caught. 2 of my friends disagree. They feel that DBS means that you are not that sort of person at all. The other friend is of the opinion that it is possible, but highly unlikely. AIBU or are they?

DBS is just one of a range of tools to minimise the chances of someone unsuitable working with children and other vulnerable people.

On its own it is of limited use but alongside other things such as references and having a working environment with appropriate visibility when working with children and among people who will challenge when they feel something isn't right it helps.

Enhanced DBS, what you need to work with children and vulnerable adults includes a "soft section". This is space for non-conviction information, and can be added by the police, an employer or safeguarding team. Things like being arrested (but not charged), being interviewed under caution, employer investigations and disciplinary outcomes. It was introduced to ensure that those people who had perhaps been suspected and even interviewed (such as Ian Huntley) were flagged.

It's not true about overseas. The responsibility is with the employer to decide if someone is safe. They can request overseas checks carried out by their police or DBS equivalent. If they aren't happy then they don't appoint.

It is not the DBS at fault. It is the job of the employer or safeguarding lead to make decisions about safe recruitment, using DBS, references etc.

Yanbu. Of course they're useful in filtering out people who are known to be dangerous, but as you say it does nothing about those who have never been caught.

Tarheelbaby - the CRB system was overhauled in light of the Soham murders.

The DBS process is a small part of the safer recruitment process and must be used alongside effective safeguarding polices and procedures.

Most of the people I come into contact with who have committed offences against children have a clear DBS at time of being caught and already working or volunteering with children.

It only tests if they have been caught and charged with an offense. I too work with vulnerable people and I have had multiple DBS checks in my time.

A DBS check is worthless the day after it's issued.

No it isn't. A lot of people commented ting obviously have no recent experience of safer recruiting.

I'm pretty sure Vanessa George would've had a dbs/CRB check. Teachers and nursery workers generally have them and its not like they've never been known to hurt children. The majority don't, of course, but DBS checks aren't infallible.

They've never claimed to be infallible! They are meant to be used as part of a safer recruiting policy, and ongoing safeguarding measures.

Well I know full well the man who groomed me at 14 (but only had sex with me when I was 16 - what a gent!) is in possession of an enhanced dbs and teaching high school students, some on a 1 to 1 basis, so...

(I don't want to go to the police because I have no proof or witnesses, my entire community will side with him because he's a manipulator and it would be a massive emotional can of worms for me, so I'm not doing it)

But it's important to note that it's not just offences against children / adults at risk that could make someone unsuitable to work / volunteer with children / adults.

It's all part of a bigger picture and is essential to deter potential offenders.

I see it as it just means they've never been caught doing something untoward. Donr mean they havent

I can think of three separate people working or providing extracurricular activities at schools in my area who all passed DBS checks until they were caught and convicted of child abuse offences. There is no foolproof system.

And without a DBS system those people would continue to work with children.

No system is perfect but it's better than nothing.

@Thistlebelle. They havent been through the process. Until today they believed it was every country that was checked

And I agree it isn't perfect but it's better than nothing

I think the tone on the thread is a little fatalistic, to be honest. DBS checks aren't worthless, or anything like that. They are a valuable safeguarding tool. Obviously we also have to exercise our own judgement alongside them.

Devilishpyjamas - Does it mean you haven’t been caught or you haven’t been convicted. Two people working with my severely disabled son have been sacked after punching him. The police investigated both cases and they were both sacked but I have no idea whether it would show up on a DBS. Was given conflicting information.

It depends whether they are now on the Protection of Children Act (POCA) list. An enhanced-ldvel DBS disclosure includes information from POCA and POVA (Protection of Vulnerable Adults) lists and List 99 (sex-offenders register). You don't have to be convicted of an offence to be placed on the POCA & POVA lists. Following the Victoria Climbie and Holly Chapman/Jessica Wells (Soham) murders there was a move to ensure that bodies with responsibility for protecting children & vulnerable adults could share information without having to meet criminal-law standards of evidence, although one of the first things David Cameron did when he was elected was to water down the Every Child Matters programme and undermine these efforts.

The Scottish system is a live record through the PVG (Protection of Vulnerable Groups) system. So, if I were to be arrested, charged, or cautioned, my employer would be notified. This is for anything - even when I got caught speeding.... it means that it’s more sensitive to these softer concerns, as you are notified you are being considered for listing as unsuitable. It’s slightly better than it used to be, which was the old straightforward disclosure which was only as good as the day it was done on.

The police in England can inform your employer I'd they feel it necessary.

It only shows they haven't been caught/ convicted up to this point in time. I totally agree with you. I would always still rely on my instincts as well as checking that people have DBS.

At my ds's old primary school, one of the TA's was sent to prison for child porn on his computer and they found covert camera's he had set up in the changing rooms and toilets.... guess he must have been checked before they gave him a job but if no prev conviction then it is neither use nor ornament. It really is not a personality test of will they won't they

Only a small percentage of sexual offences against children end up with a successful conviction, I want to say 6% but I haven't fact checked that. So the vast majority of offences are either unreported or not successfully procescuted. You weed out some sex offenders with a DBS check nothing more. On average two children in any class will have experienced sexual abuse of some sort by the time they leave school, it is a wide ranging and very common issue.

DBS doesn't only cover convictions or charges though. That was the point of the overhaul post Soham. People like Huntley - repeatedly accused of inappropriate behaviour, but never convicted, will now be tracked. That 'soft' information can be included.

It doesn't make a system perfect. If a person has never been reported, or questioned, then there's nothing to mark their record. It does mean that those convicted, and those repeat offenders who previously could just move (like Huntley) are weeded out.

It only works in combination with good safeguarding in places where vulnerable people are looked after.

Have people read the other posts? It doesn't just show the convictions. It shows soft information like a number of unsubstantiated allegations, investigations, arrests, interviews under caution.

IT DOESN'T JUST SHOW CONVICTIONS.

And it ha several sold itself as some form of one stop check.