AIBU to expect schools to inform parents about relevant safeguarding convictions?

[Whattodoaboutthis1]

A father of one the children in my child's class has been convicted of possessing and making child pornography. He was given a 12 month prison sentence that was suspended for 18 months, he's on the sex-offenders’ register (SOR) for the next 10 years and he's got a 10 year sexual harm prevention order (SHPO).

The only reason I know about this is that the related news article was briefly posted on the local FB group - one of the admins of the group removed it a few minutes later. The school haven't acknowledged it or addressed it at all with the wider school community.

AIBU to think there should be some sort of notification system for parents when someone who is a parent of a child at the same school as your child is convicted for child porn (or any similar offence) and added to the SOR?

I do appreciate it's a really difficult situation for all involved, especially the child of the man who's been convicted, but I think the school should have discreetly informed the other parents and shared any related safeguarding policies for reassurance i.e. confirmed to all he would no longer be allowed at school for drop off, pick up or events.

If I hadn't happened to see the article when it was briefly on Facebook (or heard through others who saw it in time) we'd have absolutely no idea. We could have accepted invitations to play dates or parties at their house unknowingly.

What also worries me is how difficult I've found it to find any concrete advice or information on what someone like this man is allowed to do and where he is allowed to go. I am pretty sure he's not allowed in the school grounds anymore, but from what I've read he could still take his kids to the local swimming pool or to the local park... But then there's some conflicting information on this!

YABU: it's your job to do your own due diligence and check that every parent of every child at your child's school isn't on the SOR.

YANBU: the school should have sent out a discreet notification to parents at the school for awareness.

Well that’s not true, is it. If they suspect a child is being abused at home they don’t just shrug their shoulders and say “not on our watch” do they.

I don’t know that I think it’s the schools responsibility to alert parents to sexual predators. But I do think parents should be made aware by someone - police/social services for example (and most likely delivered through the school as they’ll have the details of which children are most likely to come into contact with this person). When you’ve had a child abused by an adult with a known past & you know that people kept quiet because “it wasn’t their business” and that choice directly lead to your child being harmed, you’d probably see it a bit differently.

@Whattodoaboutthis1 I honestly thought, once convicted they would no longer be allowed in the family home?

A friend of mine was told never to allow her exh back into her home again (accused / sentenced) or her child would be removed. Her exh was the child’s father.

The police need to do more with informing any new partners, the sickos get involved with, in order to keep children safe.

Well that’s not true, is it. If they suspect a child is being abused at home they don’t just shrug their shoulders and say “not on our watch” do they.

If the school has a suspicion that a child is being abused they have a specific duty to report it to social services or possibly the police. They don't have a duty to act themselves in any way at all: intervene, tell any other parents, take action against any person, remove the child or publicize the matter. And in fact they must not.

The school's duty is to bring a concern to the attention of the appropriate organisation. That is all. Definitely not to comunicate that concern to other uninvolved parents.

In any event, the fact of conviction of a child's parent is not equivalent to and does not rise to a reasonable suspicion that any child is being abused.

you’d probably see it a bit differently.

Actually I see it as my responsibility to be aware of the possibililty of abuse of my children by any adult, whether I know they have a conviction or not. People who don't have a relevant conviction are not "safe". Everyone who abuses a child does so for the first time at some point - no amount of "they should have told me" would enable a parent to prevent that. That's the point of appropriate safeguarding.

(sorry - meant to edit my earlier post, not to quote it. You get the idea though.)

Exactly - they have a duty to report the safeguarding concern. Which is what I feel needs to be done here. The concern that a parent with a sexual conviction has access to children should be reported to the appropriate person - which in this case is the parent of any affected child.

The idea that you be happy to be ignorant while your children are around convicted abuser if they were yet to pose a specific threat to your child is either a blatant lie or hideous parenting. I’m not sure which.

Of course anyone could not be safe. But in life we have to make calculated choices don’t we. Unless you’re suggesting you never leave your child with anyone other than yourself?

The idea that you be happy to be ignorant while your children are around convicted abuser if they were yet to pose a specific threat to your child is either a blatant lie or hideous parenting. I’m not sure which.

Ok. Once we start with the straw men, deliberate misinterpretation, and personal abuse, I'm done. Night night.

No deliberate misinterpretation here.

Apart from the Facebook post, how would school know?

It's to safeguard his children. I can imagine already that this gossip has been rife and discussed in front of some of the kids - wonder how long before his child is called names because of the father?

The word “discreet” appears several times in the OP.

How on earth can this be done discreetly?

If the court case was reported it will be picked up by the local news sites and posted on social media. Everyone in town will know about it

YABVU, this information does get assessed and dealt with by people trained to do it, and they manage that risk moving forward.

I have seen this information get into the public domain and seen how people in general can't deal with it at all, and go on to behave appallingly. I have seen vigilante behaviour, windows being put out, where bricks have gone astray, and the neighbouring windows have gone out instead, and an innocent child has been injured. I've seen wider family members ostracised to the point where they have lost businesses and then their home, where they have also been put at physical and mental harm as people have taken their frustrations out on them.

Dealing with this risk is definitely best left to the powers that be, trust me. Too much information in the wrong hands can be dangerous and cause more harm.

The school cannot tell parents if they know about the charges due to GDPR.
Unfortunately unless he has an order which specifies he has to stay away from schools there is nothing that can be done to stop him entering the playground.
The sentencing of these vile creatures is a joke.

It could fall under an operation endeavour. I know that's mainly for domestic violence but we've have them through for many ACEs

Poor kids 😢

Don’t is the term child porn.

It’s a community matter, not one for the schools.

That said, be thankful you know. I can assure you, 100%, that there are probably another 20 at least in the same school. They may not all be convicted, but they will be viewing and sharing CSAM. Could be friends’ parents or grandparents, could be people your dc already spend significant time with, have sleepovers with, or you could be one of those families, your brother, an uncle, a grandparent. Trust me, having been on the other side of this, they really are everywhere.

Absolutely not all men are a danger, definitely not, but you almost certainly, statistically speaking, have one in your family too. They may not have been caught yet. Or maybe they have. I have 2 in my family, convicted on actual abuse charges not CSAM. I was never informed, no SS involvement at all. Despite having contact with my dc. I never would have found out if I hadn’t had a gut feeling and done my own digging. It’s so incredibly common.

Genuinely not sure how you think the school will be aware of this anyway. They're not running DBS checks on parents. They might become aware via social services if the child is being removed or there is a concern around harm to the child but that would have to be confidential for the child's sake.

We do have a public justice system which gave you the means to find out about it but I really don't think it's fair to expect the school to be told in the first place and proactively tell parents.

I was just thinking this through. As a DSL (designated safeguarding lead) I’d know through a few different avenues.

We might get an Operation Encompass notification, which is a system of notifying schools about police involvement in a family. However, these now have very limited information (name of child involved only).

In a case like this there is likely to have been a Strategy meeting with police and social services to decide upon the risk to the child. As a result of this, the child may be classed as a Child in Need or a Child Protection Plan may be agreed upon.

Finally, we are often told by the child or other parent.

In all of those cases we are bound by confidentiality. We can’t share the personal data of any of our families. If information about an offender needs to be shared, it is the job of the police and the courts, not schools.

These people are everywhere. Of course they have children, families etc. They are usually managed in the community by offender managers, probation and their children will have social workers.

In any school there will be several children whose parents have engagement with the criminal justice system, some who are subject to child protection processes due to actual or potential significant harm. Every single school.

You could equally argue that you don't want your child going to the home of a child who is subject to a CP plan due to risks of Neglect or in the car of a parent who has been prosecuted for driving offences etc etc.

We are not in medieval times where the parents and families involved could be locked in a public set of stocks or something at pick up so you can all see....

It is completely unreasonable to believe you should be included in the comms around the management of all these situations. You just need to keep your wits about you, listen to your gut, help your dc understand basics around safeguarding etc.

Given his conviction I would be surprised if he was allowed to remain in the family home.

A lot of that would only apply if the child was in the school at the time of the arrest/conviction wouldn’t it? If they moved to a new school or started school completely then the new school could well be unaware still?

either way as you said it’s not schools information to share, and even in school it is only shared as needed. I was thinking more from the POV of offering support.

Safeguarding information should be recorded and information shared with the new school.

This is helpful. Thank you