To think I can't be a social worker with these convictions?

[gymbopo]

2 convictions on my record - drink driving and communication act (domestic). Was charged 11 years ago about 4 months apart for each. Was 19 at the time.

Had a terrible year mental health wise, going through a horrific break up although this is not an excuse but the truth. I have changed my life and really want to become a social worker however, I'm not sure I can be with these convictions.

Anyone any idea?

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/scotland/work/disclosure-and-the-pvg-scheme/disclosure-and-the-pvg-scheme/disclosure-and-declaring-a-criminal-record-s/

this says

“Check if you have to declare your criminal record

When applying for a job, the employer can ask you if you have any convictions. You do not have to answer, but you might not be offered the job if you choose not to.

If you do answer:

you do not have to declare spent convictions, unless you are applying for an exempt occupation such as a doctor or social worker
you will have to declare unspent convictions.”

Hi OP,

I was in a similar position as you also being in Scotland although I am a midwifery student, however, my friend works at disclosure Scotland.

You are correct, a category B offence is automatically removed from your disclosure after the 15 years have elapsed if over 18 or 7 and a half years have elapsed if under 18.

For the offences you mentioned as they are category B offences then they will come off your disclosure after the 15 years has elapsed automatically, there is no need to apply for a sheriff.

I think that previous posters are getting confused so I'm going to provide an example. Say in the case of your communications charge you got a fine - that is spent after 1 year of the conviction. Now although this will still show up on disclosures, by law you do not have to disclose it unless you are working in a place in which is a protected profession, in your case, social work.

So 8 years pass and you decide that you want to go in to youth work, this type of work would require a PVG, this means that since the time of 15 years hasn't elapsed this will show on your PVG but still not on a basic disclosure due to the fact that your disposal of a fine was spent after 1 year.

You would receive your PVG ten days prior to your employer and with your PVG would be a letter from disclosure Scotland that states,

' You can apply to a sheriff for removal of a 'spent' conviction or convictions appearing on your certificate. A copy of your disclosure certificate won't be sent to the person who countersigned your application until we know whether or not you intend to apply to have your spent conviction removed. Certain spent convictions are disclosed on higher level disclosures, as is the case for your current disclosure application. One or more of your spent convictions are eligible for you to apply to a sheriff for removal.'

Now you are being given this option as the 1 year has elapsed but the 15 year of automatic removal has not. You may apply to the sheriff for removal and they will determine whether the conviction is relevant to the type of regulated work. Many people don't do this though as it is very time consuming.

Should you decide not to apply for removal from a sheriff, once the 15 years have elapsed it will automatically not show on an enhanced disclosure or PVG, therefore you do not need to declare it after this time.

Certain jobs such as the police, certain criminal justice social workers, etc. have to undergo very enhanced checks and this means that things such as cautions will be available including spent convictions no matter how long that time has passed. As well as this, checks on your finances etc will be looked at to check if you are vulnerable to blackmail and the likes.

So for those types of jobs, yes you will always have to declare them as well as your convictions you received under 18 that were removed after 7 and a half years.

If you look at social work jobs in Scotland, you will see on the applications that most only require a PVG and so all that will show is you two convictions until the 15 years elapse.

I hope this makes sense, I too am unsure of what @RJnomore1 is speaking about. DBS and disclosure scotland are two separate organisations with different rules and regulations and has nothing to do with your question at hand.

This
you likely won’t pass the required DBS check

In relation to DBS checks -

'If you are applying for a job or role which is ‘exempt’ from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and which requires a standard or enhanced DBS check, your DBS certificate will disclose details of all spent and unspent cautions and convictions unless they are eligible for removal (often referred to as filtered or protected).
If your criminal record meets the criteria set out below it will automatically be removed from your DBS certificate at the time an application is made.'

The OPs conviction is filtered so she will not have to disclose it AFTER the 15 years and as it clearly states here, it is automatically removed.

@NicolaSixSix but the OP has claimed that she isn't barred from any type of regulated work with children or vulnerable adults so she has already passed the 'DBS check' or PVG check in Scotland.

You're fine op, I hate to see misinformation being spread here. Good luck, you'll be fine.

You'll have to declare them and they'll ask for an explanation. This is at the point of joining the course. When it comes to SW there's no such thing as a spent conviction. You have to give a full work history as well. You have to register before you go on placement. I was only five years off getting a caution when I started my training. They are much more lenient over offences committed as a teen. I'd get in touch with your local University who offers the SW BA, they are the best people to advise. A DBS is something different. I know Nurses who had convictions for violence committed as a teen. When on the SW BA we had someone get kicked off when it can to registration, they switched to sociology and are working with young people. By the sound of her work, what she was doing had a much more direct benefit than SW does.

They are very picky - I was refused due to having a 2:2 despite 15 years relevant experience, clean dbs (nothing drops off enhanced checks btw) and advanced training. So not being overly studious at age 20 plus a bereavement the day before my exams started means I'm ineligible to be a social worker

@hearditthroughthegravevine convictions are never spent for SW. It's the registering body who decides who is allowed to proceed. It's made up of a panel of people in the industry.

No an automatic no but you will have to declare it and will likely be asked about it at every interview you do, it may or not prevent you working with extremely vulnerable people depending on employer and answer you give. Don't want to put you off, and often people with more colourful life experiences can bring a lot to this type of role, but do be prepared for questioning and brace yourself for a possible rejection. It's worth thinking about whether you could handle that or not.

Incorrect, the SSSC is the registering body for social workers in Scotland and here is their guidance.

OP has B1 convictions which as I previously stated ONLY HAVE TO BE DECLARED FOR 15 YEARS.

This is for social work, the literal regulatory body for social work says this! The amount of misinformation on this thread is worrying. The way in which people will provide such false information with confidence, yikes.

Please people stop spouting information that is clearly in factual.

Colleague in nursing had a custodial sentence age 17. He spent 6 months and then another 2 weeks in prison. Charge was burglary and something to do with having a weapon (he didn't, it was a glass bottle he was drinking out of). He was homeless at the time.

He's always declared his offences, and usually been called into a meeting to discuss them. It helps that there's nothing on his record since age 18. It sounds like you were a similar age, and much time has passed. Good luck, I hope it works out for you.

Not Social Work, but I risk assess PVG/Criminal Convictions for other programmes - teaching & healthcare, mainly. The Uni you are interested in might be a good first point of contact. We are very careful not to admit students who may not be able to register at the end of their studies. We work closely with the registration bodies on this.

If you're a long way past a conviction, then you shouldn't be unfairly penalised for it. Everyone has a right to turn their lives around. I can think of at least two students/former students who have served custodial sentences when younger, and have gone on to register as healthcare professionals.

No, it doesn't. It is the university that makes those decisions. I know there or four qualified social workers to whom all the above applies.

three

Except the specific bereavement one but a former colleagues mother died by suicide with long term effects on her school performance

None of it is “in factual”, people are talking about two different systems of vetting - the difference between England and Scotland.

The OP didn’t state in her OP that she was in Scotland, so if people haven’t read all her updates they are then making factually correct statements but pertaining to legislation and it’s practical application in a different country.

@ZealAndArdour they're not even giving the correct information for England though as government website clearly states -

In relation to DBS checks -

'If you are applying for a job or role which is ‘exempt’ from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and which requires a standard or enhanced DBS check, your DBS certificate will disclose details of all spent and unspent cautions and convictions unless they are eligible for removal (often referred to as filtered or protected).
If your criminal record meets the criteria set out below it will automatically be removed from your DBS certificate at the time an application is made.'

OPs convictions are filtered - so same in England, they will be removed after 15 years.

Can't stand people on here talking shite as if they have a clue. It's actually embarrassing.

@hearditthroughthegravevine yes I spoke too early and thank you for correcting me and for writing your detailed post
@gymbopo ignore me!

In my university two people had to go before a panel. They were allowed to progress but I don't know what their convictions were for.

@entropynow

The university said they cannot take candidates with under a 2:1 no exceptions. It's been that way for over 10 years (when I applied) I had a sponsor, my local council! They wrote to 4 universities including one with very low grade requirements for other courses and was told categorically no

Just for English colleagues, not the op as she knows everything about everything:

you don’t “pass” a PVG; you become a member of a scheme, and the only way you aren’t allowed is if you are barred from working with children/vulnerable adults by the Scottish government. Each employer then risk assesses appointing you based on the information on your scheme record and it’s also updated to the employer if you do anything while working (studying/volunteering too) for them.

The barring standard is pretty high, so you can join PVG with offences that an employer would risk assess as being unsuitable, and different employers may have different standards (NHS are very risk averse for example).

The question earlier was whether it shows up and according to the SG a spent conviction in B1 would show up, my advice would always be just be honest. It doesn’t necessarily preclude you but something showing up you haven’t declared would be an eye brow raiser. It should be one person you need to talk to as well, not the interview panel.

The above is the best advice I can give anyone.

@hearditthroughthegravevine i don’t know what you think you read up there but it was the op said she had “passed DBS ie PVG” , and that it was basically the same thing, and lots of posters talking about DBS. I’m quite clearly saying it’s different although it’s for the same purpose.

I'm scrolling back and I don't think at any point the op said she wasn't going to declare her convictions or be dishonest.

She had stated that she wouldn't have to declare them after 15 years have elapsed unless she was to say, for instance, try and join the police...the rehabilitation of offenders act 1974 does not apply to the police. So 50 years could have elapsed in that instance and she would still have to declare it (and wouldn't be able to join the police).

What the op has said is correct, but you've argued at every turn it would appear.

Quite odd really.