[SCA-AE] Parents -- WAS: Background checks for youth.

[Tim Button]

Greetings from Tigranes,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Ann" <lhann at twcny.rr.com>
To: <discussion at aethelmearc.org>; <AE_ChancellorMinors at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 12:48 PM
Subject: RE: [SCA-AE] ANNOUNCE: Background checks for youth.

snip

> If you can't watch your
> children or bring someone trusted to do it for you, then they should stay
> home with some other supervision.
>
> I'm not upset with the laws or procedures, but I AM heated that parents
are
> so apathetic that we have to have this in place at all. If this
legislation
> passes, it will be more proof that people are lazy and expect the
governing
> body do their work for them while complaining that they do it badly. The
> entire "need" for this makes me so indignant and disgusted that I just
can't
> keep silent on the topic.

I beleive you are misinterpeting the causes of the BoD actions.

I think that the vast majority of parents in the SCA do an excellent job of
supervising their children or see that they are properly supervised.  It is
NOT because we are all letting our children fun wild that this is being
done.  What's more, once implemented, I personally don't believe my daughter
(**or the new child we just learned is on the way**) will be any safer for
this policy.  We do our best to make sure our child is within our sight,
even when involved in organized youth activities.  The new policy will not
change that.

If anything, it may (in a VERY tiny segment of parents) encourage less
attentiveness, since some may adopt the attitude that since everyone
involved with youth has been checked, there is no cause for vigilance.

The true motivation is that SCA Inc. is covering it's butt.  If the worst
happens (meaning a child is assaulted), and a lawsuit is brought, Corporate
can point to this policy as proof they are providing the framework for a
safe environment, and not liable for damages for any bad occurance.

> You will find in the future that honest volunteers will not want anything
to
> do with children's activities, legislation will become more and more
> strict. Autocrats will not want the headache of having to deal with it and
> so children's activities will be less frequent at events. And who can
blame
> them? Parents will end up entertaining their own children at events -if
> minors will be allowed to events at all. The parents who will not watch
> their children make it harder and harder for everyone else who does.

I agree with this assessment of the policy's effect.  As I said in an
earlier post, I hope my gloomy outlook is unfounded.

I hope that Corporate is extremely careful when it chooses the agency that
is going to do the checks.  Identity theft is probably nearly as frequent a
crime now as child abuse within the SCA environment.  If such crime can be
traced to sloppy security within the check process, that's sure to bring
about lawsuits.

Tigranes

GOLD is for the mistress-silver for the maid-
Copper for the craftsman cunning at his trade."
"Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall,
"But Iron-Cold Iron-is master of them all."
----Rudyard Kipling