Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think a DBS check is not 100% guarantee?

121 replies

PurplePenguins · 04/04/2018 20:06

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?

OP posts:
Glumglowworm · 05/04/2018 15:10

All a DBS pass means is that you’ve never been caught

It can’t show things that you’ve done but got away with and (of course) it can’t show things you might do in the future.

It’s a starting point only. A DBS check is never a substitute for good safeguarding practices.

Numbkinnuts · 05/04/2018 18:12

Te the soft information on a DBS. I can assure you that it will not show all unsubstantiated allegations.

Some allegations re a persons conduct may not reach the threshold for police intervention so I school for example will investigate. It may not be substantiated, the person my still remain in their job. On the other hand if it is substantiated and person gets sacked a referral must be made to the DBS. Believe me the threshold for DBS to put that person on the barred list is extremely high and therefore unlikely.

Information that police hold on unsubstantiated allegations is disclosed at the discretion of the Chief Police Officer therefore again not guaranteed.

allchangenochange · 05/04/2018 18:17

numbkins I had debated writing this very post. I just wanted to agree with it completely!

Numbkinnuts · 05/04/2018 18:21

Agree with allchangenochange.

To get convicted of a sexual offence against a child , probably with exception of possession of indecent images, the likelihood of conviction is low.

Firstly the victim needs to report it - it may not be reported for some years later if at all.

Needs to meet CPS threshold for charging then needs to get to the hearing where a jury must find guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Numbkinnuts · 05/04/2018 18:21

lol just agreed with you too Smile

violetfeather · 05/04/2018 20:30

I would be very careful about relying on your instincts in determining whether someone may be a sex offender. My dd was recently drugged by someone who tampered with her drink and then subsequently raped. The chap concerned has many friends in common with my dd and is hoping to get a job in an industry driven by connections. He pertains to be gay to everyone and comes across as nice as anything. He is a high functioning sociapath. Within a week of being interviewed by police he was out clubbing and also featured in a video raising funds for a trip. His whole Facebook page makes him out to be a consummate professional with many friends and he extols the virtues of a fairer society, campaigns for the Labour party. Be warned about what people let you see. It may not stand for anything.

violetfeather · 05/04/2018 20:50

Also the guy will be looking at teaching singing as an income stream.

squarecorners · 05/04/2018 21:01

violetfeather sounds very similar to the guy I mentioned. People who take advantage of more vulnerable people are very often everyone's best friend, salt of the earth, mother Teresa incarnate, which is exactly how they get access to people they want to abuse. The bloke who groomed me is a church youth leader, organises community events, teaches in a high school and is involved with youth work in a very high profile, household name organisation. He's also married now but I can't help thinking his prediction for teenage girls can't have gone away overnight. I know I wasn't the only one he at least tried it on with. I might have been the only one stupid enough to fall for it though, I don't know.

squarecorners · 05/04/2018 21:01

*predilection. Stupid auto correct.

Newname12 · 05/04/2018 21:11

The bichard enquiry, following the soham murders, drew attention to the fact that information wasn’t being shared nationwide.

So as well as the formation of the independent safeguarding authority, a national database was set up so all forces can see each other’s records. And not just convictions or arrests, every report or involvement at all.

So, for example, if @squarecorners were to report to the police, a crime would be created of sexual assault, with this man as the offender. It doesn’t matter if she then refuses to cooperate further, or an investigation is done and they can’t take it further, or it’s a “he said, she said” situation.

That record now exists. When a dbs check is done it will be seen if relevant, and it will be taken into account for an enhanced dbs check. It will be reviewed by the police safeguarding unit and used to make a decision, along with any other reports, as to whether that person should hold their position.

Numbkinnuts · 05/04/2018 21:16

But whether it's disclosed on the DBS is another issue sadly.

Barbaro · 05/04/2018 21:18

If it helps your argument, I know of a people who passed dbs checks and then was found guilty of having child pornography a few years later. It's not certain at all, no security clearance is really. It's a moment in time, things change. Just the higher you go, the more honest you have to be if circumstances change, such as with driving fines, convictions etc.

steppemum · 05/04/2018 21:22

DBS on;y flags up if you have been caught.

I do safeguarding training and there are 2 important things.

  1. by having DBS required on the top of the application form, it is a strong signal that the organisation takes safeguarding seriously. It makes people who are dodgy think twice.
  2. The most important thing is that the organisation, whether a school or a creche run by volunteers, has a good safeguarding culture. There are systems in place to ensure that there are no opportunities for people to offend.

Most offenders I think offend many times before they are caught, so I don't think DBS is that effective really

Firgoodnesssake · 05/04/2018 21:35

Agree with you also OP. DBS check only advises if people have never been caught

violetfeather · 05/04/2018 21:54

Squarecorners I'm sorry for what happened to you. I had a small amount of counseling just to try and get my head around what happened. Perhaps you may also benefit from this. I just see the guy as a criminal, as a con man who is deliberately and carefully creating an image of Mr perfect. He then uses this position and the 'mutual connections' to leverage trust and then swoop in. Other bystanders thought he was gay so thought he was harmless. He fooled everyone completely. You really can never tell. I've watched the video of him trying to raise money and literally there is absolutely no sign that reveals he would do what he did. I will forever never have confidence in my judgement. Now I look at the Facebook page, all the career profiles he's set up in preparation for trying to get more freelance singing work and you realise that within the industry he is in, he constantly is in the position to repeat what he did to my dd.

reallyanotherone · 05/04/2018 21:57

Agree with you also OP. DBS check only advises if people have never been caught

An enhanced dbs check will advise if people have reported.

Dozer · 05/04/2018 22:00

Hope the people who think DBS means all is well are not involved in safeguarding!

Numbkinnuts · 05/04/2018 22:03

Reallyanotherone there is absolutely no guarantee of that believe me.

violetfeather · 05/04/2018 22:06

The other thing you think is why did he do that within a group of people, many of whom would be working with him in the future. It could be so potentially stupidly reckless but apparently that is exactly how high functioning sociapaths behave. That is why you could never assume that he didn't do it because how could he go clubbing just after being interviewed by the police, how could he brazenly make a video raising money for himself to go on a trip. It is precisely because he is able to carry on as if nothing happened that makes it more likely he could have done what he did do. This is the kind of predator that you can never detect and take sensible precautions to protect yourself from until the damage has been done.

steppemum · 05/04/2018 22:09

DBS only flags up if you have been caught

Ok, so it doesn't literally only mean if you are convicted, but if you are reported/interviewed etc, all of which basically amount sot the same thing - you have to have been found out at some point by someone.

Most of the historical allegations we have seen over the last few years would not flag up on a DBS
I personally know someone who served convictions for child rape and for possession on thousands of images of child pornography. He had a clear DBS and helped in a sunday school class, for years. THEN he was caught. Fortunately that same Sunday school class had rigorous safeguarding procedures in place, so he was never alone with a child, and never attack a child in that setting due to lack of opportunity.
That is the goal of any organisation, create no opportunities.

I doubt very much if most people are caught on their first offence.

birdsdestiny · 05/04/2018 22:13

No one says it's infallible but if you come across peopke who object because it's a pain in the arse or an attack on their civil liberties or some such, run very fast from those people.

steppemum · 05/04/2018 22:15

I agree birds - it is not infallible, but it IS the first wall that an offender has to cross, and having it there immediately puts some people off.

Numbkinnuts · 05/04/2018 22:15

Steppemum not quite sure what you mean ? He had convictions but then he was caught ?

If he had those convictions and had the right level of DBS then they would have shown

Numbkinnuts · 05/04/2018 22:17

I've just re read your post and it kind of makes sense now Wink

user1471450935 · 05/04/2018 22:24

As the husband of a PNC operator, she has done it for 27 years, in the police force, so heavily (IMO wrongly) criticized in the Bichard inquiry, of course DBS is heavily limited and flawed.
It doesn't even stop the offenders from applying for 1000's jobs daily in jobs they are banned from. They rely on someone like my overworked wife, making a mistake or using one their many fake names to beat the system. It's a joke, that people believe DBS or even enhanced DBS is a safeguard against abuse. Also the system Bichard lead to for sharing information, is highly time consuming and unwhelding, they are heavily under staffed and often have 100's every shift, but they not only check all their forces possible records and deals with the person requested, but also any dealing they have had with other forces too, all 40 odd of them, some have only 24 hours to response too.
It is better than nowt, but dangerous, that the average man/woman on the street thinks if you have a DBS, you are safe to look after their kids/venerable adults.