Male volunteer - Guides & Rainbows - arrested on suspicion of grooming

[Oldstyle]

Not clear if this person is trans or simply male but I thought that men who identify as men were not allowed to volunteer with these 'female-only' groups? Worrying either way.
www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/17207657.north-kent-girlguiding-volunteer-arrested-on-suspicion-of-grooming/?ref=twtrec

I'm a GG leader running a unit with 2 other (female) leaders. It is clear in our safeguarding training that no adult should be alone 1-1 with a child, for the safety of the child and the adult. It's just common sense.
I really hope that this individual, on investigation, has been held to the same patterns of behaviour regarding safeguarding within GG as he should have been by the local volunteer teams.
He may well have volunteered with ill intent, but, if policy has been followed diligently, no girl should have been at risk.

Safeguarding doesn't start with policies and protocols. It is rooted in a sophisticated understanding of identifying and managing risk which requires reflective practice. The framework includes policy and legislation.

This, this, this.

Reflective practice is vital. Safeguarding is not a tick box exercise.

"He may well have volunteered with ill intent, but, if policy has been followed diligently, no girl should have been at risk."

And yet girls were at risk.

He was allegedly contacting children in order to groom them. He could have sent pictures of a sexual nature or encouraged a girl to perform a sex act. He may have never been alone with a girl but still have groomed her. That girl was still harmed. Great harm can come to children from adults that have never been alone with them. And of course, most of these people will go on to try to be alone with the child.

The policy did not prevent that. He just ignored the policy. Which anybody with ill intent is going to do.

The presence of policies within an organisation do not eliminate all risk to children. Because they can't. They are only policies.

It is like saying that there should be no criminals in our society. Because we have laws.

He was allegedly contacting children in order to groom them.

So OBVIOUSLY this man broke GG protocols by grooming the children but, within GG protocols, he could easily have found out the children's addresses from the database (which he'll have had login access to) and gone to their houses, or rung and hoped they'd answer the phone.

He would likely have been alone with 2 or more girls as it's common to have 1 adult and a small group of girls e.g. one group is cooking and the other doing craft in a different room. This is allowable under GG policies.

He could have become extra friendly with one or more girls and then made an effort to bump into them as they left school/were in town/were walking home. Making "special friends" is not allowed under GG policies but nobody could stop an adult from doing this. I certainly know some girls better than others (because they live near me or their parents are my friends).

And we're encouraged to speak positively to girls who try hard/do a kind act/cooperate with the group so all adults will be speaking more positively to some girls than others.

Men have always been allowed to volunteer with units just not as leaders so its got hee-haw to do with being trans or not. Its for GG to decide if having men fullstop is a safegaurding issue.

Its for GG to decide if having men fullstop is a safegaurding issue.

They have already decided, fairly sensibly, that when men go on a residential or help on a swimming trip or are in a unit setting that they shouldn't be sharing accommodation, toilet facilities etc. with the girls nor should they be providing intimate care.

So they are able to see that men pose a different set of safeguarding issues to women leaders and helpers. They just have a set of trans blinkers on them which say "magic fairy dust, these men have become women, shazzam!"

(As I'm not a safeguarding specialist, and as girls and boys are both groomed and abused by men they know through other contexts, where men are separated from girls even if they identify as trans - I'm not sure what could be done differently here. I'm assuming the procedures were followed by everyone apart from the perpetrator. Maybe not. Maybe someone noticed that he wasn't following them. Maybe not. Maybe he didn't get that far with the actual units as the reported behaviour was online with a different individual).

When you've worked alongside a paedophile, once it is uncovered, you spend endless hours looking back and reviewing how you missed the signs. There is a terrible realisation that your actions may have unwittingly placed a child at risk of harm because you saw the adult's behaviour as 'well intentioned, caring, committed, child centred' and actively placed a child in that adult's 'care'. I know of too many schools, sports clubs and youth groups that have had this experience. It is the ultimate betrayal of children.

It is hard to confront 'slightly off' behaviour and often it is not one incident but a pattern of small worries and this depends on colleagues being prepared to think and say the 'unthinkable' - effective safeguarding policies are essential if this is to happen.

I often have to step away from these discussions as my rage is immense at the organisations and individuals who actively advocate for the undermining of safeguarding policies for children. I cannot believe that our politicians are so complicit in enabling these groups and their anti-safeguarding beliefs.

The central message of safeguarding for me has always been that no-one is above suspicion. I remember having to confront that head on to myself: yes, I am not above suspicion. That wonderful teacher I admire, love working with and has been brilliant to my kids - he's not above suspicion. The sports coaches who've become friends; the parent who comes in to volunteer who I've known since our little ones were at preschool; the woman I employed to work with classes to I could expand my business - none of them get a free pass. Safeguarding taught me I have to swallow my pride and not consider myself infallible. The framework is there for a reason - not everyone, or even anyone, will pick up on covert behaviour.

In many ways it feels like an insult. I'm a good person! I wouldn't dream of hurting a kid. But you know what, I'll take that insult right on the chin, because no-one gets to bend the rules on this.

The central message of safeguarding for me has always been that no-one is above suspicion.

Exactly. Safeguarding is supposed to be sceptical. That is the point of it. Which, with regard to trans issues, is why so many of us are shouting Red flag! Red flag! when activists take scepticism as a personal affront. If you react to safeguarding concerns as an attack on your personal identity and can't see past that, you shouldn't be anywhere near children or vulnerable adults.

Don't you think as Leaders, we don't have the ability to sniff out a dodgy bloke in a dress & say no to their help?

What is the difference between being able to sniff out a man in a dress, and being able to sniff out a man in trousers? As this man didn't get sniffed out did he?

Didn't GG say that they only reason this was dealt with was because of the publicity?

Male volunteer - Guides & Rainbows - arrested on suspicion of grooming

gosh, that didn't take long did it? And how many more children have to harmed before the Guides reconsider their idiotic policy?

I would like to send them a "I told you so" postcard.

If you react to safeguarding concerns as an attack on your personal identity and can't see past that, you shouldn't be anywhere near children or vulnerable adults.

This a million times. A fragile ego isn't a good enough reason to put kids at risk.

The central message of safeguarding for me has always been that no-one is above suspicion

Absolutely. And I have to realise that even though I think know I am safe myself, that I may be encouraging behaviours in those children I am looking after that would not be safe for them, if they were with a person who is not safe.

I've received an email from GG today. They haven't changed their policy but their FAQ's for discussion with parents have taken on board quite a lot (but not all) of the issues raised.
They seem more inclusive of transboys, recognise that privacy and dignity for all is important - but are sticking to the line of non disclosure of someone's trans status, and that they are a single sex organisation (can't agree with their thinking there)

Funnily enough, I just received a response to my complaint to GG about their policies.

Here it is:

The safety, wellbeing and happiness of our members is at the heart of everything we do in Girlguiding. That means we work hard to make sure every girl gets the opportunity to be their best. And this includes trans girls.

Recent media attention isn’t about anything we’ve just changed – or something new we’ve told the newspapers. We updated our inclusion guidelines back in 2017 to make sure what we do is in line with the Equality Act 2010.

The Equality Act 2010 says that organisations like Girlguiding which provide single-sex services should treat trans people according to the gender they identify with.

We understand people have concerns, for example, about when girls share accommodation.

In reality, we’ve found this comes up very rarely. When it has, we’ve worked with everyone, including parents when appropriate, to balance needs and make sure every girl feels comfortable. This has included organising separate facilities for anyone who wants or needs them. We support anyone who asks for alternate accommodation or facilities, not just trans young people. Our leaders are trained to make safeguarding decisions on a case by case basis.

Data protection law means we have to protect the privacy of every member’s personal information, and keep it safe. It is illegal to share personal or sensitive data about an individual without their permission, and this includes sharing that a trans person is trans.

But this is not just about data protection. We’re proud to provide a safe space for LGBT members. It’s part of what we do

organisations like Girlguiding which provide single-sex services should treat trans people according to the gender they identify with.

What on earth are they talking about? Do they mean that no males are allowed but girls who prefer to present with a masculine gender will not be booted out? So yes, obviously, dur.

Or they just conflating sex and gender like they have no idea what they are talking about?

oleanna have you mentioned the magic words ‘in the event of a serious case review, it will be noted that youbwere informed of the following risks...’ ?

FFS! Excuse the shouting but this is making my head burst. I have the unfortunate job of investigating safeguarding cases. It makes my skin itch every fucking time, not just because of the vile shite I uncover has happened but also due to the sick and manipulative ways in which these individuals go about it. In plain fucking sight. And this happens now, even without self ID. The systematic dismantling of safeguards will, without doubt, increase abuse. Some people are sick fucks. That's the long and short of it.

And whoever said they could spot one of these sick fucks please tell me how? What does it look like?

I note that there is an ad for volunteering with GG that has popped up on MN on Chrome...

Bowl - I was thinking about what to say in a reply... Good idea...

Cc their insurers in as well :)

Make sure it has a positive read receipt and file that and their replies.

magic fairy dust

Indeed. With the belief that anyone who self identifies immediately becomes exempt from any kind of safeguarding, as if the invocation creates a magic state of utter safety in the invoker.

We have Karen White, Jess Bradley, the Challoners and Fae demonstrating this is really not the case, or a sensible illusion to buy into.

Shame really. If we could only rid the world of male violence, child abuse and sexual abuse overnight by getting every male born person to just carry a gold lame purse and a really good red lippie.

Ability to sniff out a wrong un whilst there is something to be said for women's 'creep radar' reliance on that rather than good safeguarding policies worries me greatly. And how far do you think explaining your spider sense is tingling is going to get you when they are shouting bigot and t**f at you?

One of my elderly neighbours turned out to be a pedophile, liked young teen boys. He'd been offering to coach myself and my (at the time) young teen boys in a sports activity we all did that he was an expert in. Despite me being surprised at how keen he seemed to be to coach us I didn't detect anything to concern me and I'm pretty cynical. I didn't take him up on the offer fortunately.

He was done on 1 historical case, conned the judge that he was too old and frail for jail. Still going strong many years later