OMG! They are taking the peadophile thing a bit too far me thinks!

[mamadiva]

I don't know if this has already been done.

The Wright Stuff is on and apparently, men who are in parks are to be quizzed by passing wardens as to why they are there if they don't have a good enough reason they could be sent away or arrested if acting suspiciously!

Is it just me or is this just taking it too far?

Yet again it's men who get targetted, so if a woman is sitting in a park alone it's fine? I don't understand this!

I have four enhanced disclosures Blu! And none of them would enable me to work for you or any other new setting. Bonkers. And expensive too.

Whaaattt? So the campaigners were thrown out of the park because they weren't CRB checked?!? Since when did you have to be CRB checked to enter a park?!?

Or be risk assessed to dress as a penguin!

This is why my dh hates taking his own children to the park.

It's such a bloody lot of crap when peple are scared to take their own kids to the park for fear of being called a perv!

We can't allow this to happen wish there was a way to stop it!

I'm surprised they don't fit all our homes with cameras to see what we are doing at home to.

Exactly, FD.

Say we asked one of the teachers already working with one of our group members to freelance for us....they would not be allowed to teach the very same child they spend all day with in our setting!

Last summer we were offered two very expensive day trips by a city bank who promote volunteering on a regular basis. They would have provided coaches, lunch and dinner, entrance fees and a specialist guide to make the best of the educational oppportunities of a great day out. This would have been for 40 young people who arrived in this country as 'unaccompanied minors' - i.e child refugees without parents. The required ratio of our CRB checked staff would have been the pimary carers, and all the young people were 14 or over.

Because we could not guarantee the exact list of volunteers and get them CRB checked by us (because the bank could not guarantee which employees could be freed up on the day) the trip had to be cancelled.

that is crap Blu, how rubbish

I don't know Blu and Megglevache I think the CRB checking is better than none.

And most parks have bylaws - passing out leaflets is against the bylaws of my local park, as is busking or selling anything. People go to the local park to have a bit of RnR, not to be leafleted.

The bylaws of my local park exclude all adults without children from the playgrounds, and children over 12 aren't allowed play in some sections. I phone the Parky if there are teens/hoodies and solitary men in the children's playground - but they are welcome to go to the other areas of the park.

at fio and her joy at talking to strange men.

But surely there will be a legal challenge to this park warden thing?

For a start, if I was one of the wardens, and suddenly had added to my JD approaching members of the public, intrrogating them and deciding whether they should be ejected on my inexpert and untrained judgement, and was likely to get punched in the face in the process, I would go straight to my union.

And surely being ejecte fom a public space on suspicion of potential paedophilia, without any evidence whatsoever, is defamation of character, or something??

I live right next to a public park and we do have a problem with drunks having a sleep during the day. But you no what? They are bothering no one and everyone tells their DCs to give them a wide berth.

Paedos or not, we are slowly losing our liberty to a bunch or power crazy pen pushers.

Men have as much right to access public facilities as anyone else.

I've not been in a park for years now and I never will now. I used to walk through one to get to work and it was great to get away from the traffic fumes. Now even if they said nothing I'd feel uncomfortable.

Who needs grass, trees and flowers anyway

Onager - don't feel like that!

This is only one park...and as you can see from this thread, everyone thinks the council is outrageous...and noone thinks that adults should not be able to enjoy parks!

The cop in your head is of your own making

Thanks Blu. I'm quite a way from the nearest park now so it mostly won't arise, but it does feel creepy to think (some) people think that way.

But not normal people.

And you can't live your life according to the whims of nutters, obsessives, cranks and the illogical!

To the poster further down who suggested that this might be a way of getting rid of the drunks and drug users in the park: Surely they have a reason to be there, so wouldn't be challenged?!

Those cunning paedophiles, disguising themselves as penguins! Guaranteed to escape suspicion in Telford, as you can barely move for penguins there... Just as well the helpful park wardens were there to make the parks safe by insisting all penguins are CRB checked.

I think we should take it further. I should be CRB checked before I go to Sainsbury's this afternoon - there are loads of kids there, and who knows my 'real' reason for being there? I mean, I might say that I'm out of milk, but that could just be a ploy! In fact, we should all be CRB checked and get an id card that says 'guaranteed non-paedo, allowed access to all public buildings and spaces' and then show it to the authorities on request in order to be allowed out of our front door. Well, someone has to think of the children, and I for one think if one little tiny child can be saved, then it's worth sacrificing our entire society, way of life, and our children's childhoods to achieve that aim. Call me Tory, but that's just the way I see it. [gazes misty eyed into the middle distance]

Our gorgeous local park is situated near a large block of retirement flats. Many of the park benches have plaques attached reading things like "This bench was donated in memory of Fred and Freda Bloggs (or whoever) who loved this place".

I hope our council won't be tempted to remove these facilities on the off-chance that Fred might have been a pervy old wanker, instead of an elderly gent enjoying the sunshine and flowers.

13 years ago, when I was a Suit in the City, the company I worked for celebrated its 150th anniversary by taking the whole of Year 1 from the Sir John Cass primary school in Tower Hamlets to London Zoo. EVERYONE in the company had to attend, from the Chairman to the canteen staff. No-one was CRB checked, although naturally the teachers also accompanied the kids. None of the 90 5 year olds who came were molested, injured or mislaid and a wonderful time was had by all.

It's such a shame that this type of trip, which benefited tiny children from one of the most deprived estates in the country, would never be allowed to happen today.

I was worried about the NSPCC advice that was in the Guardian last week - if you see a young girl itching herself "down below" you should report it. So if a young girl has simply forgotten to wipe her bottom properly and has chaps, her parents will be investigated. And even if the authorities decide it is all innocent, that will be on their records forever and discoverable on an enhanced CRB check. So no helping with school trips, going into teaching, anything like that. Life ruined forever.

A teacher took their local police to court because they lost a job offer over an unfounded allegation that had come up on a CRB check and the court upheld the police's decision to put the allegations on the teacher's record. So you have no protection - unless that teacher takes it further and the Court of Appeal has a different view, like with the bouncy castle case.

The stupidest, stupidest thing about all this is that many paedophiles have of course never been investigated or convicted. So they have clear records and would pass all these over-bureaucratic tests with flying colours and in they go, oh OK its all safe because everyone's passed their check. No it isn't. The safest way to deal with all this is sensible, calm awareness and vigilance by everyone and making all kids aware of what can happen and that they must always tell someone asap. It is secrecy and silence and shame that lets paedophiles get away with what they do - and however far you take record-checking, it will never weed them all out.

So if a child is most at risk from adults they know then surely we shouldn't be allowed to take them to the park we would have to send them with crb checked strangers instead.

Another nail in the coffin of children's safety and freedom then. That poor child who died in a pond a while ago, died because the only adult who saw her wandering alone on the street, was too afraid to stop and help her in case he'd be accused of paedophilia. Soon, no adult not actually related to a child will ever help them out so if a child is stranded somewhere and they need help, the only adults who will have the confidence to help them will in fact be paedophiles.

I went to a child protection course recently and was shocked by how hysterical it all is. I mean, I kind of knew it was but sort of thought it was all Daily Mail hype. And unfortunately, it isn't. It was all so depressing.

Bella I studied child protection too and some of the facts are shocking yes but I think the hype' far outweighs actual fact when it comes to a childs safety, it's just not how it should be.

Obviously peados are a threat but are they really sitting in libraries/parks/swimming baths and supermarkets all day waiting for soem poor child to stumble into their clutches? That may happen some times and one time is far too many in my book, but the facts far support the opposite in that a child is more likely to be targetted by someone close to them than a total stranger so perhpas we shouldn't be allowed to take our own children out and maybe CRB checked stramgers should be allowed to take them instead, as per fact that would put the child in less danger

I think the thing is the media when faced with a strnager abduction/murder they focus on it alot more than if it's a family member or similair, of course that ishow it should be when it comes to alerts etc but why should they shout it from the rooftops from the alert thrugh to the bastard being sentenced where as iif it's someone close to the child then it's like a little article and maybe one or two things on the news. I think this where the hysteria comes from.

It's sad when two children who have died an equally horrid death are treated so differently in the media, here in Scotland the murder of little Casey Leigh Mullen (RIP cutey) by her Uncle was reprted once or twice in a small corner of the newspaper but when you compare that with other high profile cases such as Sarah Payne (Sleep tight little 'un) which was reprted all the time it does make you realise why we all think of 'stranger danger'.

I don't mean any disrespect to the children or famillies of the 2 children named I think what happened to both of themn was horrific, I was just trying to point out that the media does enforce 'stranger danger'.

Sorry I know this all off topic in a way but just wanted to rant abit...

Have actually just read my last post and don't hink it has anything to do with the subjecta nd I realise I shouldn't ahve included any names I'm sorry if anyon eis offended I will request it is removed. Sorry