[MR] Safety

[David Chessler]

I was a boy scout leader for some years. As you may know, the boy scouts have
to take some care to avoid predators. They do this in several ways--not
permitting unrelated adults to share a tent with boys; and all adults in
leadership positions have to supply a police statement of "good conduct."
There is no cost for this. It is a bureaucratic mess, but the information--the
certifications--go to the next higher level. Thus, in SCA terms,
certifications for leaders in a barony would go to the kingdom. New
certifications have to be obtained from time to time.

As things stand in Atlantia, I believe (but am not certain) that youth
marshals must all be cleared. Furthermore, I believe they are not to be alone
with juveniles, but there must be two or more adults around. And, unless there
are at least   3 people present, they must not be "out of sight." This means,
not in closed tents, closed classrooms, etc. 

It is not certain that the SCA has a significant problem. The boy scouts
certainly do, and have to make an extraordinary effort. (The Girl Scouts have
similar procedures, but I do not remember them as clearly.) In the past, the
scouts were able to control the problem by informal means--by knowing the
other adults. "The past" ended in the late 1980s and early 1990s. 

It is true that we allow the general public into our camps and demonstrations.
However, we in the SCA have many leaders, and, if child molestation IS a
problem, we can train these leaders to be alert for it. 

------ Original Message ------
Received: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:39:31 PM EDT
From: ". ." <lizmaekate at hotmail.com>
To: <atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org>
Subject: Re: [MR] Safety

> 
> Hello All,
> 
> There is so much wrong with the idea of EVERY member getting a background
check.  First, the sheer cost is very prohibitive.  Who would be forced to
pay, the potential members or the Society?  How much would that drive
membership prices up?  Second, how would that stop anything?  It would prevent
perfectly good people from joining due to privacy concerns (ie, who owns that
data?   Who is conducting the background check?  How long is that data stored?
 Who has access to it?) and due to the cost.  Who wants to join something
where you have to pay a couple of thousand to volunteer?  It would drive
people away quickly.   And how is it catch people who haven't been caught
previously?   You only have a record if the police are notified.  Also, there
are some people who have been forced to register as a sex offender because
they were 18 and the person in question was 16 or 17 (I know of one case where
it was the 18 year old's fiancee!   They got married but he still had to
register 
>  as a sex offender).  And what about the people that have been falsely
accused?   
> 
> Also, who is to say that a child predator -or any type of predator- couldn't
just walk up as a non-member and pay the gate fee?  Would only members be
allowed at events then?  That would be problematic within itself.  From
discouraging newcomers to simply not being able to bring someone who is
getting elevated's loved ones in for the day, it would really hurt the Society
as a whole.
> 
> The way to protect children is for parents/guardians not to be stupid. 
Sorry to be blunt, but I can't think of a more kind way to put it.   You don't
let your kid go off with someone you just met.  You don't let them sleep over
at a person's house who does not have children themselves and that you've only
known for two weeks.  Also, train your kids!  Teach them to kick and scream if
someone tries to take them away from you or from a public area.  Teach them
that if they feel uncomfortable, to run away and get back to you or at least
back into a public area.
> 
> Background checks aren't the answer.  Responsibility for yourself and your
children is.
> 
> -Isabella
> 
> > Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 02:37:47 +0000
> > From: "Helen Rogers" <hennabyhelen at mail.com>
> > To: roriktheviking at yahoo.com,atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
> > Subject: Re: [MR] Safety!
> > Message-ID: <20110822023748.164580 at gmx.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>  I child's safety and causes are something very near and dear to my heart. I
agree that the safety of children is often one that tends to lapse in
consideration. As there should be a more thorough criminal backgro
> >  und check (as you sighted), I think it MUCH more important that anyone
joining or existing member should have a child assault/abuse background check
done, in my humble opinion. Why? Because as you have noted, parents tend to
lay such responsibility on anyone else around (and I know of what I speak).
I'd have no problem with anyone checking my background, mostly because I've
been a nanny and still babysit (and do truly adore kids and the "reality
check" they give us all :) ... ). But, we can't simply dismiss the "Oh, he/she
would never do anything like that" and assume things, as we all know what
assuming does. If someone has issue with a background check in relation to
children, I would be more worried about why, than potentially offending them
... and I hope parents would agree. This is, of course, my humble opinion. I
know several may agree, but it takes several to make a change. Cassandra
> > 
> > 
> 
>  		 	   		  
> ========================================================================
>                    The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>     List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>   Submissions: Atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
> Subscriptions:
http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/listinfo.cgi/atlantia-atlantia.sca.org