[MR] Background Checks

[Kelly Keck]

While I totally agree that we need to protect our kids, and that the
proposed background checks will at the very least prevent sexual predators
who have already been caught from taking a chancellor of youth or youth
marshal position, I see some *major* drawbacks here.

**First, we are talking about the kingdom shelling out not hundreds, but
thousands of dollars.  At a quick count on a map, I see 42 local groups in
Atlantia.  (Please correct me if I miscounted, but it's a good ballpark
figure.)  I can easily name a dozen people in my barony who help with
children's activities, and other people have mentioned that 20 or so people
in their group do the same.  Multiply that 10-20 people by 42 groups by,
let's say, $20 a piece, that's 8400 to 16,800.  Even if, as one person
suggested, the SCA can get a non-profit group discount and the background
checks are 3-5 dollars each, it could still run a couple thousand.

Remember that we're not just talking about officers here.  Anyone who
teaches a kids' class or helps out at children's corner for an hour may have
to have a background check.  Remember also that this is a recurring
expense.  Two to sixteen thousand dollars *every two years.*

I'm not putting a monetary value on the safety of our kids; truly I'm not.
I'm simply pointing out that with this system, what is likely is that the
kingdom will not be able to afford it and will pass it on to the local
groups or the individuals, some of whom also won't be able to afford it, and
we're likely to see a lot less in the way of kids' activities in the future.

A couple people have suggested having the volunteers themselves pay.
Personally, I think it's a little insulting to someone who's already giving
of their time (and is probably paying out of pocket for some of their
supplies) to expect them to pay for the "privilege" of running children's
corner or teaching a youth class by paying for their own background check
every two years.  Do we ask our autocrats to foot the bill for the site, or
the head cook to pay for feast?  As a chronicler, I don't pay out of pocket
to send out the newsletter, nor does the baronial knight marshal buy the
group's loaner armor.  Granted, some of those are larger amounts, but it's
largely a matter of principle.  If background checks are a Society
requirement, they're something that should be paid for by the Society at
some level, not the individual.

I've already said it, but let me say it again because it's worth repeating.
We're not just talking about people who take on an office.  We're talking
about the person who says, "Sure, I'll read a story to the 6-year-olds
before feast" or "Hey, wouldn't it be neat to teach a youth class on siege
weapons?"  or the one who volunteers for a half hour to assist the
Chancellor of Youth with kids' corner.  How many of those people will still
volunteer if they have to pay out of pocket for a background check?  And how
i discouraging is it to the person who volunteers to teach a kid's class at
one event to say, "That's great, thanks...here's your background check
paperwork. It'll cost you twenty bucks"?

**Second, the SCA could probably reduce this amount quite a bit if they'd
just accept existing background checks, as long as they're current.  If, as
deputy Chancellor of Youth, I have to undergo a background check, it will
probably be my fifth in the past five years.  It strikes me as ridiculous
that the states of PA and MD will trust me to teach a roomful of kids and
the Federal government will trust me with classified information, but
neither of those is apparently good enough for the SCA to trust me with
children.  And it's even worse to suggest that I pay for my own background
check, when my background has been checked thoroughly and repeatedly
already.  Between all the volunteers who are teachers, government employees
with clearances, police officers, or are working with Boy Scouts or other
youth organizations already, how many of the proposed background checks are
going to be done on people who have already had them?  Those checks, at
least, are a huge waste of money.  The SCA might want to set some kind of
minimum standard or list background checks it will and won't accept, but a
blanket statement that no existing checks will be accepted is silly.  That
means that a certified teacher who also works with Scouts and just completed
a background check last month--nope, doesn't count, have to do it all over
again.  Granted, even if the SCA accepts existing checks, those will also
expire at some point.  But it would at least reduce the costs somewhat and
avoid wasting time and money checking people who have already been checked.

**Another problem, as has already been pointed out, is that organized
children's activities are not necessarily the place a sexual predator looks
for a victim.  Granted, not every kingdom has Atlantia's two adult rule, but
is a predator really going to try to harm a child at children's corner going
on in the main hall or during a class where there are six or eight other
kids as witnesses?  I would love to see statistics on the number of child
abuse cases in the SCA to find out what percentage of the offenders had
anything to do with official children's activities.  Also, might we not be
creating a false sense of security?  If every children's officer, deputy,
and youth marshal has had a background check, will parents feel comfortable
letting their kids run around unsupervised at events, making them that much
more of a target for a predator?

**Another question to consider is how these background checks will be
conducted and the time tables.  Will everyone just get a form that they have
to fill out and send back to the approved vendor?  Will there be
fingerprinting involved, and, if so, can you get fingerprinted at your local
state police office or military base, or do you have to go to a specific
location?  And how long will the checks take to go through?  It really puts
a damper on kids' activities if, a few months out from the event, the
Chancellor of Youth is turning away volunteers because they haven't had a
background check, and it's too late for them to get one completed in time
for the event.

I think that, before announcing that this would be done, perhaps the BoD
should have put it out for discussion and consideration, with details
regarding when the decision would be made.  It sounds as though the decision
has been made already, but a lot of issues have not really been considered.
It would also have been far simpler to have had the SCA as a whole adopt the
two-adult rule that Atlantia uses.  Not a full or a perfect solution, but an
improvement that could be implemented quickly and easily while they figure
out if, how, and for whom to implement background checks without bankrupting
kingdoms or running kids' programs into the ground.

In Service,
Lady Adriana Michaels