Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Is this a safeguarding issue

98 replies

footballtime · 10/02/2023 23:56

Scenario is that Fred (aged 20) is a volunteer football coach at a club for young people aged 11-18, those who are still school age. This role requires a DBS check.

David is a young person at the football club. David is 18 and has only a few months of school left until he leaves after completing his final A Level exams.

Fred and David are 2 years apart and get on well, having got to know each other through the club. They consider each other friends. Fred knows David's mum and has a good relationship with her too.

Fred and David would like to meet, unrelated to the football club, for lunch in a local cafe. They will both travel separately to and from the cafe. Given that Fred is technically in a position of trust, and that while David is 18, he is still a young person in the club, would this be a safeguarding issue?

OP posts:
Elephantscantjump · 11/02/2023 08:31

monicagellerbing · 11/02/2023 08:22

There is no 'safeguarding' for an 18 year old. He's an adult

This. Position of trust essentially bumps the age of consent from 16 to 18. But these people are both adults and David isn't a vulnerable adult from what's been said.

londonrach · 11/02/2023 08:40

They both adults

SuperSange · 11/02/2023 08:46

They're both adults, so it's not safeguarding, but it's a position of trust thing. How many of you saying it's not a concern would be happy with their 18 year old meeting with a newly qualified teacher outside of college? It's only a 3-4 year age difference, but it's the position of trust that's the problem, not the ages.

DelorisVC · 11/02/2023 08:50

A safeguarding team would laugh if this was referred to them.
Charities and organisations often have policies in place that over complicate child protection /safeguarding practices.
They can often be counterproductive because offenders will use this to hide behind.

It creates a culture of" oh gosh better not do this because of silly old safeguarding" A common sense transparent culture is safer practice.

neverbeenskiing · 11/02/2023 09:10

The concern came because when Fred mentioned to his volunteer boss/leader that he was planning to meet David for lunch, the leader advised caution as David is still part of the youth club until he finishes his A Levels. The leader told Fred to ensure they met in a public place (which was already the plan anyway) and suggested that Fred text the leader at the start and end of the meeting with David. This was to ensure the meet up was "above board".

This advice is sensible.

I am a Designated Safeguarding Lead in a school that includes Sixth Form. If David was one of our Year 13's and I was told that he was meeting up with a 20 year old volunteer sports coach for lunch I would not think "this is an immediate safeguarding concern", but I would have a chat with David to make sure he was comfortable with the situation. Although he's 18, as a school we would still have a duty of care towards David and although the age gap is small, Fred's role at the club means there is an imbalance of power in the relationship. Anyone who works in any capacity with children and teenagers should be aware of this.

Sadly, there is a long history of teenagers and young adults being groomed and exploited by men who work or volunteer in sporting organisations so the group leader is right to advise caution and setting boundaries. Advising caution is not the same as panicking or accusing Fred of anything.

Just because something is legal that doesn't mean it is appropriate, and many sports clubs who work with young people will have something in their policies and procedures that stipulates volunteers/staff should not socialise with members for this reason. As PP have pointed out, a 20 year old trainee teacher or volunteer at a school would absolutely not be permitted to socialise with a Year 13 student, the staff code of conduct would make this clear. This is not about legality, it's about professional boundaries.

neverbeenskiing · 11/02/2023 09:15

DelorisVC · 11/02/2023 08:50

A safeguarding team would laugh if this was referred to them.
Charities and organisations often have policies in place that over complicate child protection /safeguarding practices.
They can often be counterproductive because offenders will use this to hide behind.

It creates a culture of" oh gosh better not do this because of silly old safeguarding" A common sense transparent culture is safer practice.

What "safeguarding team" are you referring to?
If you mean the sports clubs own safeguarding officer, they wouldn't "laugh" if asked for advice about one of their volunteers socialising with an 18 year old in his own time. They should, if they've got any sense, be glad they were being spoken to about it as this is the whole point of their role. They would likely give similar advice to the group leader or, depending on their policy, they may actively discourage Fred from meeting up with David socially. They certainly wouldn't "laugh", unless they were a dick and useless at their job.

MaryShelley1818 · 11/02/2023 09:20

This is absolutely not a safeguarding issue.

Johnnysgirl · 11/02/2023 09:24

He's probably just erring in the side of caution, which is no bad thing, really.
If Fred wanted to meet one of the much younger members socially, it would be a totally different matter so it's probably wisest just to have a blanket approach to all.
Even if it sounds odd when it involves an 18 year old.

Harrysutton · 11/02/2023 09:24

The people saying it isn’t an issue don’t understand safeguarding. There has been lots of good advice on this thread re position of trust.

TheVanguardSix · 11/02/2023 09:29

Just do as the leader says. Enjoy the lunch, have a laugh, text boss/leader at start/end of lunch. Hang out but follow the rules because they exist in this situation for a reason. Too much overthinking.

gogohmm · 11/02/2023 09:32

Its one of those grey areas and you have to make a judgement call as a safeguarding lead (I am) and in this case I would not be concerned. If the helper adult was significantly older (25+) i would take a more cautious approach wanting to talk to them both but ultimately an adult is an adult no laws are broken even if a full on relationship.

Universities in particular face these situations a lot, and whilst vulnerable adults, position of responsibility is a consideration, a 20 year old is an adult

TheVanguardSix · 11/02/2023 09:37

A safeguarding team would laugh if this was referred to them.

I assume you’re not part of safeguarding.

BraveGoldie · 11/02/2023 09:41

While instinctively the individuals may know this isn't a concern in this situation, there are psychological grounds for this 'position of trust' concern.

Even if someone is the same age, if one is in that position of trust/ authority, it can cause regression on the other person's part- feeling more childish/ having a tendency to look up to/ blindly idolise/ seek approval and acceptance from the one in the authority position. etc.... it's called 'transference' in psychoanalytic terms. The effects of transference can mean that even grown adults can become unduly influenced, infatuated with, or overly anxious to please someone in s position of trust over them. It's why almost all these positions, even between adults, have a taboo around forming relationships or even friendships beyond the professional frame (priest, teacher, therapist, doctor, boss)....

If David talks about Fred with irreverence/ as if he is just another pal, it's probably fine. If he seems a bit in awe/ looking up to... that may be a sign there is a bit of transference, due to Fred's position of trust- meaning both should take a bit of extra care, or have a 'break' after the club relationship ends, before trying a friendship.

Meganshappyhour · 11/02/2023 09:43

DelorisVC · 11/02/2023 08:50

A safeguarding team would laugh if this was referred to them.
Charities and organisations often have policies in place that over complicate child protection /safeguarding practices.
They can often be counterproductive because offenders will use this to hide behind.

It creates a culture of" oh gosh better not do this because of silly old safeguarding" A common sense transparent culture is safer practice.

You obviously don't work in safeguarding.

Op I would suggest that you look at the position of trust legislation that changed last year to include sports coaches.

Meganshappyhour · 11/02/2023 09:45

SuperSange · 11/02/2023 08:46

They're both adults, so it's not safeguarding, but it's a position of trust thing. How many of you saying it's not a concern would be happy with their 18 year old meeting with a newly qualified teacher outside of college? It's only a 3-4 year age difference, but it's the position of trust that's the problem, not the ages.

Position of trust is safeguarding !!!!

SuperSange · 11/02/2023 11:40

Meganshappyhour · 11/02/2023 09:45

Position of trust is safeguarding !!!!

Show quote history

Not in the same way. there are different 'types', for want of a better term. This scenario in the OP would absolutley be of interest, but for different reasons to say, a 9 year old and a 20 year old. Surely that's obvious?

Temporaryanonymity · 11/02/2023 11:53

Agree with the advice re position of trust.

it has the potential to impact upon the experience of the other team members, who may pick up on the relationship between Fred and the other one and feel excluded. This obviously isn’t a safeguarding issue but can have a negative effect.

if I was in charge I’d be advising Fred about professional boundaries.

UsingChangeofName · 11/02/2023 12:18

Meganshappyhour · 11/02/2023 09:43

You obviously don't work in safeguarding.

Op I would suggest that you look at the position of trust legislation that changed last year to include sports coaches.

Show quote history

This.

It seems quite a few people on this thread have not done Safeguarding training around this whole PoT issue.

This really is about protecting Fred. He needs to be advised against this.

Thelnebriati · 11/02/2023 12:32

A safeguarding team would laugh if this was referred to them.

A safeguarding team should do no such thing. Anyone should be free to report anything they are concerned about without being worried they are overreacting, wrong, or will be laughed at.

RedHelenB · 11/02/2023 13:06

footballtime · 11/02/2023 00:10

No, 18 year old David is not vulnerable.

The concern came because when Fred mentioned to his volunteer boss/leader that he was planning to meet David for lunch, the leader advised caution as David is still part of the youth club until he finishes his A Levels. The leader told Fred to ensure they met in a public place (which was already the plan anyway) and suggested that Fred text the leader at the start and end of the meeting with David. This was to ensure the meet up was "above board".

No harm in being careful I suppose

PAFMO · 11/02/2023 13:12

Thelnebriati · 11/02/2023 12:32

A safeguarding team would laugh if this was referred to them.

A safeguarding team should do no such thing. Anyone should be free to report anything they are concerned about without being worried they are overreacting, wrong, or will be laughed at.

They wouldn't. We don't.

It is difficult for those involved (and can be seen on this thread with the comments about it being "ludicrous") to understand that it would absolutely be a concern. We have ex students become assistants with us and suddenly placed in the situation where they have to distance themselves from the people that the previous year they might have been sharing a room with. That's life. One is now in a position of trust and by virtue of that, the other person is vulnerable. Not in the way most people who don't have safeguarding training think, but vulnerable nevertheless.

We've (thankfully) only had one instance similar to the OP. Ex student turned assistant, gets very friendly with student. 1 year age difference. He was sent to another centre to finish his contract and not re-employed.

Meganshappyhour · 11/02/2023 13:15

The key thing is does David coach Fred ?

Meganshappyhour · 11/02/2023 13:16

Sorry the other way round

CoffeeInTheClouds · 11/02/2023 13:23

Being a volunteer working with children and young people, I know that safeguarding policies are there to protect the adults as much as they are children. Not only do we need to be doing the right thing, we need to be seen to be doing the right thing to avoid any possibility of suspision or false allegations.

Of course, a friendship between an 18 year old and a 20 year old who share a common interest is perfectly normal. However, being in a position of trust makes that friendship more complicated. The coaches' advice seems perfectly sensible to allow a friendship while protecting all involved.

2bazookas · 11/02/2023 14:28

Fred is officially in a position of trust; that's why the sports role requires a DBS.

So long as David is under the umbrella of "protected persons" within Fred's role, any kind of external adult relationship between D and F is an absolute no-no .

learning.nspcc.org.uk/research-resources/briefings/preventing-abuse-positions-of-trust

"In 2022, following our Close the Loophole campaign, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 in England and Wales and the Sexual Offences (Northern Ireland) Order 2008 were amended to expand position of trust roles to include sports coaches and faith group leaders. "

"Across the UK, it is illegal for those in a position of trust to engage in sexual activity with a child in their care, even if the child is above the age of consent (16 or 17) (Sexual Offences Act 2003; Sexual Offences (Northern Ireland) Order 2008; Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009)."

Fred must be seen to maintain proper DBS boundary with members of the football team. Any breach could seriously affect DBS he needs for any future career.

Fred should bear in mind that his DBS colleagues are obliged to watch for and report any signs of boundary-crossing between a coach and pupil. Read the list of "recognising signs". Fred's already stepped in red flag territory.