[MR] Background Checks (A long email with my suggestions)

[Cathrine Woods]

While this has been an interesting discussion and many
excellent points have been made, I believe that the
intent of the BOD is to minimize the liability
exposure of Corporate SCA as several gentles have
pointed out.

The SCA cannot afford the expense and negative press
of defending a lawsuit if they have not made a good
faith effort by requiring background checks for all
persons IN CHARGE of children's activities or
activities where minors are allowed to participate. 
This does not mean that any person having contact with
a minor needs to be vetted, but that all persons in
supervisory or leadership positions have proof that
they have not had a history of predatory behavior. 
This means, IMHO, that all officers, autocrats,
feast-o-crats and teachers.  Volunteers who are just
dropping by to help out are under the supervision of
the activity leader and therefore the liability rests
with that leader.

While trying our best on a local level to keep our
children safe is good and necessary, the background
check issue is not primarily to insure that the
children are protected.  It is to make sure that the
SCA is protected.

As always, this is just IMHO.

Katerina deKestevan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com