| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Just imagine | |
| Posted by: | Sam Hearn | |
| Date/Time: | 28/08/14 14:12:00 |
| Hi Vanesss - I think that you mean the DBS (Disclosure & Banning Service) the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) and the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) were merged in 2012 with cross party approval. It is impossible to prove what might have happened if CRB/DBS checking had not been in place. But surely children and vulnerable adults should be protected from those with a record of harming children and vulnerable adults. Effective deterrence and prevention controls are usually preferable to detection controls. Although detection controls are of course important - e.g. Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford and Leeds. However the following extract from Wiki shows that the system has been far from perfect in the past and can cause unintended adverse consequences; "Sociologist Frank Furedi has stated that CRB checks cannot provide a "cast-iron guarantee that children will be safe with a particular adult", and that their use has created an atmosphere of suspicion and is "poisoning" relationships between the generations, with many ordinary parents finding themselves regarded as "potential child abusers". The restrictions imposed by the CRB check process have contributed to a shortage of adult volunteers in organizations such as Girlguiding UK. In February 2004, the National Audit Office criticised the CRB for "huge" delays. In May 2006, the Home Office revealed that about 2,700 people were mislabelled as criminals during checks.[19] In 2009 the CRB's Enhanced Disclosure was criticised for including details of any minor contact an individual has had with the police, even where no formal action was taken against them." |