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.

YABU
the school needs to safeguard children there. I’d expect them not to allow this parent any unsupervised contact with children and to be involved with the family themselves.
they’re not a bulletin service for gossip. You have no right to this information; you need to look after your children when they’re in your care. The legal system wouldn’t advertise this why would the education system?

Honestly I think paedophiles should be executed. They can’t be rehabilitated and remain a constant threat to children.

Jesus yes let's just move straight to mob rule.

Schools are not legally allowed to inform parents of other parents’ criminal convictions even if the staff wanted to do this.

Hang on, so the dad doesn’t actually do pick ups and drop offs and is nowhere near the school? What exactly do you want the school to inform you of then? Do you think they should have a wall of shame with all the parents criminal convictions? As long as he is not breaching his register terms then it sounds like you want the gossip.

Well, as you obviously already know and are happily gossiping about it on social media, I don't see what you expect 'the school' to do that you haven't already done? Don't attempt to dress up your nosiness as social conscience!

By foghorn in the school newsletter of course.

It's an utterly ridiculous paradox which the OP seems to be unaware of their cognitive dissonance over.

Another thing you think schools should be responsible for?? Policing the community.

That would depend on the age of his victims. It might be assessed that if victims were over primary age, there is (no) lower risk to anyone under the age of 11.

Many first offenders do not serve a sentence. It depends on the severity of the offence. Do some people then do other things as they perceive they ‘got away’ with their first crime. Yes. Of course they do. No different to any other criminal who might escalate from petty theft to robbery (violence).

@Whattodoaboutthis1. It would be gross misconduct and breach of safeguarding to share that information. Particularly as they have their own child that needs consideration here.

you should be considering any known and unknown adult that your own child spends time with a similar risk. The only reason you know about this one is because he has been caught.

sex offenders come in a variety of shapes and sizes. It is scary how many started out as victims themselves. How many committed offences against their own siblings, children, wider relatives. Even at young ages.

there are websites that share information about trapped and convicted sex offenders if you google their name and ‘sex offender’.

but, as a parent, the best thing you can do is teach your child the proper names for body parts, the ‘pants rule’ (nspcc) and encourage open dialogue and no shaming in your household. Shame is one of the biggest hidder of sexual coercion and grooming.

Teaching your child proper names for body parts helps with reporting, it doesn’t prevent the crimes.

YABU. Rightly or wrongly it is not the schools information to share. Your child is not at immediate risk, this man isn't hiding in the bushes on the school playground and when not at school presumably your child is in your care or with another trusted adult.

The better question is why is the sentence for his crimes so utterly pathetic, why is he allowed to be around children or near a school or return home at all. These are questions the school can not answer. A man caught making csa material should not be allowed back out in to the community

Not the school’s responsibility. But I would find the news article make sure other parents at the school were aware of his convictions do they didn’t accidentally permit a play date anywhere near him or at his home. Filthy beast!

Yes, teaching proper names helps with reporting. It also means you’re having those conversations about who can and cannot do things to you. Increasing the likelihood of a child saying no and telling their parents. Therefore reducing the likelihood of the crime (with that child).

Schools are bound by GDPR rules so are unable to name and shame. We would be up for disciplinary action if we did!

Blimey, all kids have to do is say no and they reduce their chance of being attacked? This really should be publicised more.

They will deal with their own safeguarding issues, it isn't up to them to police whether he may go to parks etc where kids from school may be.

Many, many abused children have no idea that what an adult has done to them is wrong. Teaching them the PANTS rule can help them to know that it is, and this then allows them to say it's wrong and say no. It doesn't prevent abuse but it does reduce risk.

Of course it teaches them it’s wrong but to couple that with “then they can say no” is ridiculous. Rarely does saying no stop a sexual predator.

I was thinking this! The school can’t share anything they have found out through conversations with police/social services - but nothing to prevent parents sharing a published news article about it. That’s what is for - to inform people.

I don't know whether you're being goady or not, but predators will often avoid the child who speaks up and instead focus on the quiet child, with a disability or a speech delay, or who comes from a more sheltered background. Its not a case of children saying no, of course it isn't. It's a case of a predator picking an easier victim.

It's not failsafe, because nothing is. It's about making your child an unappealing option. It's awful if you think about it, because by implication the predator will go and find an easier victim. At the end if the day though, you've got to protect your own child.

The school can't really share that info with you, but he shouldn't be allowed to come to the school for pickup or events. He shouldn't be having unsupervised contact with his own child, never mind others!

But the PANTS rule relies heavily on children feeling uncomfortable with the abuse and not only doesn't pick up abusers who ask the child to do something to them but don't touch the child's genitalia, and where the child doesn't feel it's unpleasant (e.g. abuser gets child to sit on his lap).

Obviously the school can’t and shouldn’t but it is worth thinking about where your child goes. Mine didn’t do sleep overs, did play dates with me present or when older by being out and about/doing activities or at our house. I work in safeguarding - I don’t trust a random man or brother and while this is generally to be judged to be over the top or inhibiting my children it’s not a decision I regret. Moments like this just make you realise what people who work with offenders know - there are many within our communities.

I can understand why, legally, the school can't inform parents, but it's so frustrating, and I do agree that, morally speaking, people should know.

While yes, anyone could be a paedophile, if people know about a convicted paedophile then why on earth would they withhold that? Anyone could be a rapist, for instance, but if someone knows that Jim from accounts who I'm going out for drinks with is a rapist, then I'd like them to tell me!

And if someone's mother knew that her new husband was convicted of making CSA and yet still let him spend time with the grandkids without telling her child (because 'anyone could be a paedophile, after all!'), people would absolutely think it was morally abhorrent, and unacceptable.

But this is also why I just didn't let my children go anywhere when they were young, unless I was accompanying them. Because a child can't be expected to be capable of saying 'no' to an intimidating, dangerous man (many adult women freeze in those situations!), and because that man might not listen if they do say no.