This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Part Time James 25 Feb 16 1.35pm | |
---|---|
I work with kids at the local junior parkrun, part of the wider parkrun scheme that started off as an outlet for adults. I do it as a volunteer and give up a lot of my time, but at the same time I do understand why these days eyebrows are raised. I have found since I started doing it that I don't feel any particular attachment to the kids and I distance myself from my involvement with the kids quite a bit (the others in my team are much more natural with the youngsters so I leave them to it). I get more involved in the admin side of things. You are right, it'd be a bit weird if I had maternal instincts. I look forward to being a dad myself one day though. I'm the only member of the core team that doesn't have kids myself (we have an even split of men and women), plus I have a big beard which makes me look like a dirty weirdo. I imagine at some point at least one of the parents has thought "who is that f**king nonce hanging about"?!! There is a bit of a difference though. The majority of the kids that take part have their parents constantly in attendance, unlike with cubs/scouts etc. We are all fully DBS checked, as are cubs and scouts leaders, but I do agree with the criticism of the DBS I have heard before along the lines of "that only captures anything you have previously been caught for, not intent". I bet Adam Johnson could've passed a DBS a couple of years ago. Probably Jimmy Savile a couple of years before his death. So as someone that volunteers with a kids' event, I take no offence by comments that it looks a bit creepy. I personally know I'm not into that kind of stuff, it makes me f**king sick, and there will be a lot of people the same as me that volunteer to do stuff just because they want to give a bit back to the community. But we do live in a society where I can totally understand the concern of parents.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Feb 16 1.41pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Casual
Good post. To be fair I never said that you was all nonces, would just expect there to be a higher proportion than in everyday society. Anyway fair play to you for giving your time , for I'm assuming no pay? But i still won't be sending my boys. I doubt it, its just more likely that they'd be 'caught'. Statistically speaking, the greatest threat to children is from relatives such as an uncle, close friend of the family, father or grandfather. That's not to say it doesn't happen, it always will be a case that some people in positions of trust will abuse that trust. However most organisations that work with children directly, like Cubs, have a number of practices and procedures in place that reduce risk such as never allowing individuals to be alone with children etc (and usually reliant on having multiple positions of authority working together along with parental involvement). Probably the best bet if you're worried about the risks, is to get involved with the cubs directly and see whether there is any real risk.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 25 Feb 16 1.48pm | |
---|---|
I was seriously put in place by a bloke I work with who is a scout leader. I asked him if there was a "Don't tell your parents" badge the kids could earn. He didn't think that was funny at all. Actually, it isn't. That post earlier, I think by conrada20 was a very good one and I realise now it was an ignorant thing of me to say, even just to get a wind up from my mate!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Feb 16 1.48pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Part Time James
I work with kids at the local junior parkrun, part of the wider parkrun scheme that started off as an outlet for adults. I do it as a volunteer and give up a lot of my time, but at the same time I do understand why these days eyebrows are raised. I have found since I started doing it that I don't feel any particular attachment to the kids and I distance myself from my involvement with the kids quite a bit (the others in my team are much more natural with the youngsters so I leave them to it). I get more involved in the admin side of things. You are right, it'd be a bit weird if I had maternal instincts. I look forward to being a dad myself one day though. I'm the only member of the core team that doesn't have kids myself (we have an even split of men and women), plus I have a big beard which makes me look like a dirty weirdo. I imagine at some point at least one of the parents has thought "who is that f**king nonce hanging about"?!! There is a bit of a difference though. The majority of the kids that take part have their parents constantly in attendance, unlike with cubs/scouts etc. We are all fully DBS checked, as are cubs and scouts leaders, but I do agree with the criticism of the DBS I have heard before along the lines of "that only captures anything you have previously been caught for, not intent". I bet Adam Johnson could've passed a DBS a couple of years ago. Probably Jimmy Savile a couple of years before his death. So as someone that volunteers with a kids' event, I take no offence by comments that it looks a bit creepy. I personally know I'm not into that kind of stuff, it makes me f**king sick, and there will be a lot of people the same as me that volunteer to do stuff just because they want to give a bit back to the community. But we do live in a society where I can totally understand the concern of parents. Problem with any background checks is that its hard to prove someone is a risk, unless they've actually been done for something, and if you start to go down the 'have they ever been questioned' it becomes unfair. People generally are as honest as their options, when the consequence of honesty is being penalised and the capacity to fairly refuse clearance is limited (i.e. you have priors and even then most of the people who fail background checks to work with children are just people who have convictions for unrelated offences). After all, a known and convicted sex offender isn't going to pursue a job once they realise they'll have to pass a criminal record or background check. Most people who don't have a criminal record can pass any kind of security or background check - short of something like Direct Vetting.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 25 Feb 16 1.52pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Problem with any background checks is that its hard to prove someone is a risk, unless they've actually been done for something, and if you start to go down the 'have they ever been questioned' it becomes unfair. People generally are as honest as their options, when the consequence of honesty is being penalised and the capacity to fairly refuse clearance is limited (i.e. you have priors and even then most of the people who fail background checks to work with children are just people who have convictions for unrelated offences). After all, a known and convicted sex offender isn't going to pursue a job once they realise they'll have to pass a criminal record or background check. Most people who don't have a criminal record can pass any kind of security or background check - short of something like Direct Vetting. This is true. I think though, as has been said by others on this post, I think you did as well, I'd have more faith in the practices put in place by big organisations like the scouts and junior parkrun than the DBS itself. The rules we have to abide by are very well set out and there is no way in hell anyone would get away with anything untoward at any of our events, even if the parents didn't attend. I'm also a qualified running coach and actually even the rules around working with adults are pretty strict too.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Feb 16 1.56pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by rikz
Yes just as I thought, you won't answer. Okay, you live in Rotherham, you have a 13 year old daughter, 2 after school clubs, one run by 3 middle eastern Muslim males the other ran by 3 British women. What club would you choose ? Edited by rikz (24 Feb 2016 11.38pm) It depends is your daughter homeless or in care? If so, then they're at risk from both groups, if not the risks are slightly higher in the group ran by men, than women, because of their gender. The reality of such targeted abuse is that they target vulnerable children, typically 'troublesome' kids, those in care and those with problems they can exploit. Particularly involving abuse with multiple Muslim men, the focus is very much around targeting vulnerable kids that people like social services and the police won't be interested in. Its like people who rape prostitutes, they do so because they know the police won't give a s**t, the CPS don't care. The offenders tend to be responsible for the act, the status of the victim tends to be the determining factor in whether anyone will do anything about it.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Feb 16 2.00pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Part Time James
I was seriously put in place by a bloke I work with who is a scout leader. I asked him if there was a "Don't tell your parents" badge the kids could earn. He didn't think that was funny at all. Actually, it isn't. That post earlier, I think by conrada20 was a very good one and I realise now it was an ignorant thing of me to say, even just to get a wind up from my mate! Nah, its pretty funny. Of course putting your kids into cubs is a lower risk of abuse than letting other friends or family look after them. This is where abuse occurs. Everyone I've known who was sexually molested as a child (which is only five people), was either by a relative (two by uncles, one by their father, one by their grandfather and the other by their father best friend).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 25 Feb 16 2.03pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Nah, its pretty funny. Of course putting your kids into cubs is a lower risk of abuse than letting other friends or family look after them. This is where abuse occurs. Everyone I've known who was sexually molested as a child (which is only five people), was either by a relative (two by uncles, one by their father, one by their grandfather and the other by their father best friend). "Only five" sounds quite high, but then I don't know how big your social circle is. I don't know anyone it has happened to.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Feb 16 2.15pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Part Time James
"Only five" sounds quite high, but then I don't know how big your social circle is. I don't know anyone it has happened to. That's over 44 years. I'm one of those people that unfortunately people tend to confide in. One was a girlfriend of a friend, one was a girl I was at school with, two were people I managed in a shop and the other was a daughter of my mums friend - My mum told be about it). Thinking about it, I can think of two more. I'm like the noncewhisperer
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 25 Feb 16 2.16pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
That's over 44 years. I'm one of those people that unfortunately people tend to confide in. One was a girlfriend of a friend, one was a girl I was at school with, two were people I managed in a shop and the other was a daughter of my mums friend - My mum told be about it). Thinking about it, I can think of two more. I'm like the noncewhisperer Harsh. Horrible for the victims but not very nice for you to have to hear about either.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
LABoxers Wallington 25 Feb 16 3.27pm | |
---|---|
Sorry are there no males leaders at Brownies then?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
rikz Croydon 25 Feb 16 3.57pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
It depends is your daughter homeless or in care? If so, then they're at risk from both groups, if not the risks are slightly higher in the group ran by men, than women, because of their gender. The reality of such targeted abuse is that they target vulnerable children, typically 'troublesome' kids, those in care and those with problems they can exploit. Particularly involving abuse with multiple Muslim men, the focus is very much around targeting vulnerable kids that people like social services and the police won't be interested in. Its like people who rape prostitutes, they do so because they know the police won't give a s**t, the CPS don't care. The offenders tend to be responsible for the act, the status of the victim tends to be the determining factor in whether anyone will do anything about it. Seriously, come on, paedophilia is a much higher problem within the male population, I would say it's almost none existent within the female population. Female paedophiles/child killers are so rare that they go down in history among the most infamous criminals. And without excusing what they do they are usually working alongside a male that they are fixated, obsessed, Controlled or even abused by.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.