DBS check, is it needed?

[Deleted User]

Kim_kim wrote: »

Is that overkill? Or ensuring that people who work in the school aren’t sex offended...

I expanded a bit on this in post #38. Yes, I believe it is over-kill.


Here's another type of over-kill - again from what my wife tells me: a woman in her 50s applying for a job as a dinner lady had to have and extended DBS, or whatever the terminology is. This threw up a minor shoplifting offence from over 30 years ago. The woman is a pillar of society, but was so embarrassed by the result of the DBS that, despite being offered the job, she couldn't bring herself to accept it - even though only my wife and three other members of staff would ever know about it. Ridiculous level of intrusion!

Ms_Chocaholic

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

I expanded a bit on this in post #38. Yes, I believe it is over-kill.


Here's another type of over-kill - again from what my wife tells me: a woman in her 50s applying for a job as a dinner lady had to have and extended DBS, or whatever the terminology is. This threw up a minor shoplifting offence from over 30 years ago. The woman is a pillar of society, but was so embarrassed by the result of the DBS that, despite being offered the job, she couldn't bring herself to accept it - even though only my wife and three other members of staff would ever know about it. Ridiculous level of intrusion!

Isn't this a breach of confidentiality if you know about it too :eek::eek:

[Deleted User]

Ms_Chocaholic wrote: »

Isn't this a breach of confidentiality if you know about it too :eek::eek:

Yes. How terrible! :eek:


(I don't know the identity of the person in question, so actually - probably not)

[Deleted User]

Still not wise for someone to be discussing the content of an individuals enhanced DBS regardless of names were not used.

Savvy_Sue

MarkN88 wrote: »

If it’s regulated activity you have a legal obligation to perform dbs check.

If it's not regulated activity you may not be able to get one carried out at all.

jonnygee2 wrote: »

There should not be a requirement for this, assuming you actually mean young adults and not old children.

There are provisions in law for people helping out with vulnerable adults which allow for people to help out on an individual basis without needing a DBS check. I think this would fall under this, as the relationship between you is a personal one. Generally for VAs the DBS requirement is for people working for care organisations.

it's a bit more nuanced than that: the question boils down to whether or not there is regulated activity going on, surely?

peachyprice

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

Totally meaningless comparison. Huntley was a caretaker employed by the school, not an outside contractor doing work where there would not normally be contact with children. His girlfriend was a teaching assistant. The school DIDN'T check his references, and he applied for the job under a different name, which wasn't picked up in the police check, due to carelessness.


I walked down the high street earlier this morning, passing numerous children on their way to school. You'll be telling me next that I should have a DBS check!

No, it's not a totally meaningless comparison. Children will be likely to trust someone they have seen working at their school.

Does the fact that they an outside contractor prevent someone with ill-intent from interacting with the children, calling them over to the fence at breaktime, waving through the window when they go past on their mower? Gaining trust of children in a supposedly safe space? No of course it doens't, p@edos don't disciminate by who is paying their wages.

And as far as I am aware the high street is not a designated safe space for children. Now that really is a totally meaningless comparison.

nicechap

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

I've don't know. I'm a layman when it comes to the issue. However, my wife works in a school and from what I hear the whole thing has got out of hand. Even the contractors mowing the grass on the playing fields now need a DBS check!


Slightly off topic - I have recently toyed with the idea of volunteering at the local food bank. I'm guessing you even need a DBS check for that mundane task. Can anyone reassure me that such stupidity is not the case?

Ian Huntley probably mowed the grass whilst in Soham.

motorguy

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

Here's another type of over-kill - again from what my wife tells me: a woman in her 50s applying for a job as a dinner lady had to have and extended DBS, or whatever the terminology is. This threw up a minor shoplifting offence from over 30 years ago. The woman is a pillar of society, but was so embarrassed by the result of the DBS that, despite being offered the job, she couldn't bring herself to accept it - even though only my wife and three other members of staff would ever know about it. Ridiculous level of intrusion!

If the choice is not doing DBS checks in schools or having one prospective dinner lady having her pride dented, i know which one i'd choose.

Les79

mumx3 wrote: »

Does anyone know if employing friends, whom in the past have held DBS checks (ex teachers) to work a few hours per month with young adults with learning disabilities need to get DBS checked?

We the parents who are employing them and have known them for many years are all quite happy with them not having the DBS, but is this illegal not to have one?

To spin it another way, I would feel uncomfortable having my child, a vulnerable young adult, being under the supervision of someone who hasn't been DBS checked.

Sort of thing which can get you into the national papers to be fair