DBS and soft play

[Bareoness]

AIBU to have assumed that’s staff at soft play / play cafe places etc have a DBS?

I was at a party at one a few days ago and saw a petition this particular soft play had set up. The petition was to have this matter discussed in parliament in the hope of making it law. I’ve linked the petition.

I realise a basic DBS are only as good as the day it is granted and someone could go out and commit a crime the very next day and it won’t show, but surely that’s not a reason not to have them?

I also realise that in most cases you supervise your own child at these places. But I’m sure some of you will have been to these places and lost sight of your child for 5mins or they’ve legged it off to the loos without you knowing.

It just seems such a basic not to enforce and are t basic ones about £25 so not hugely costly (that said I realise small businesses are struggling).

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/748554?fbclid=IwY2xjawPJhzBleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETB4a080Z3dlcUZPTThPVk1wc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHvPIgJzX2ohxyYcY62gOJw_wOQhS0kRYnv08BZ5D-skg_qEyI57_fWz5DlkS_aem_X_--qj0nBTkapl-uVDTaug

AIBU - excessive and not needed.

Not unreasonable - seems sensible to have even if not foolproof.

Most people would take issue with a convicted sex offender working anywhere. No-one wants to be in close proximity to a sex offender, for quite obvious reasons.

That’s what I thought but most posters didn’t seem to have an issue with no DBS certificates which would weed out the convicted. Just curious!

The thing is that sex offenders have to work somewhere. The argument seems to be that the risks involved in them working at softplay are no greater than the risks involved with them working at Tesco/in a cafe/being a bus driver and therefore it would be pointless to DBS check softplay staff unless you're going to DBS check everyone who works in a public facing role.

Personally, I think the risks of them working in softplay centres is greater than the risk of them working in Tesco/cafe/driving a bus, but still low enough that I don't require them to have a DBS.

Unless you've asked about DBS checks at every softplay you've used then you don't care that much either!

Pretty sure anyone would have issue with a convicted paedophile working as a postman, in a corner shop or anywhere really.

It doesn't mean we have issues with staff not having DBS when they work in the ice-cream van, sweet shop or the McDonalds opposite the schools, and serving unaccompanied children (which are alone from year 4 or year 5)

not because we don't care, but because it's not realistic. Frankly, I would be a lot more wary of predators around children who have no adult than in a soft play where kids are too young to be left alone and as safe as can be.

I’m genuinely curious. Soft play in a town near me has a convicted sex offender working there recently. Parents voted with their feet and place never reopened once the public knew.

Most people aren't too keen on the idea of convicted sex offenders working anywhere. I'm not surprised that a soft play with a publicised sex offender working there had to close, but I reckon the same would also be true if it were a grocers or accountant firm.

I know intellectually that they have to go somewhere and that, based on the prevalence of paedos across the population, it's overwhelmingly likely I've come across at least hundreds of them in daily life over the years. I'm also not silly enough to think the convicted ones are less a threat than the undiscovered. Yet there's still that instinctive feeling of revulsion.

But what you're actually asking is whether people want something that may make staffing more difficult (delays and turnover) and increased prices, with a potential impact on viability, in a service a lot of us use and that it's far from clear would make either the service or wider society any more safe.

Actually, there are a lot of roles where a paedo could be a much greater threat to my DC than doing door and coffees at a place we frequent, with no interaction. If a convicted sex offender is working in my area, that may be one of the less bad permutations. I appreciate that might not be the case if eg your kid is at a regular craft class in soft play and building relationships.

It's an interesting one because you're right that although most people don't want DBS checks for softplay staff, the very vast majority would avoid one that had a sex offender working there. I suppose it's about judging risk.

Pre-employment checks on convictions would also weed it out.

Exactly, everyone goes on about stranger danger, but the biggest danger is from parents/carers, not necessarily because they're actively hurting their child, but because they're neglecting them.
The biggest risk to younger children at soft plays often seems to be older children who are not being properly supervised, and they can't have DBS checks. Or it can be parents threatening other parents (or their kids) when you ask them to get off their phone and watch their 8 year old who is trying to throw the little ones out of the baby area.
I know it's not the staff's job to intervene, and they're the least of the risks in any soft play I've ever been in.

I would have the same issues with a convicted sex offender working at a soft play centre as i would have if one was serving me at tescos. I would absolutely hate it.

The question is, would my child be at any greater risk? I wouldnt let my child out of my sight so in both scenarios the risk would be identical.