Does this make sense?

[minestrone]

Hmm. I can see your point there, that some parents would be worried.

But excluding someone from their chosen career because they don't want to sever all contact with a partner they love, someone who has served his sentence and may have learned his lesson? I am not so sure. As with many things there may be a need to look into circumstances, exercise caution, monitor properly. That does not mean a blanket ban is necessary.

Yes.

( Although I don't think too many teachers would have known convicted sex offenders on their dance card )

[xoggoth]

I think it adds a degree of separation between a convicted sex offender and your child

Hmm. I can see your point there, that some parents would be worried.

But excluding someone from their chosen career because they don't want to sever all contact with a partner they love, someone who has served his sentence and may have learned his lesson? I am not so sure. As with many things there may be a need to look into circumstances, exercise caution, monitor properly. That does not mean a blanket ban is necessary.

[minestrone]

So this new law (or new implementation) is purely designed to make parents feel more comfortable? There is no other basis besides that?

I think it adds a degree of separation between a convicted sex offender and your child.

[xoggoth]

I think I would. As long as the partner has no access to the bank premises - which they would not

Quite. Checks should apply to the person actually involved in the job. Possible some people will serve their partner's interests in crime but the idea that intelligent people in responsible positions like teaching will do so does not look overly convincing. Even if someone is not actually living with a paedophile/bank robber etc, nowt to say they aren't involved with one anyway.

Best I can find is this, mostly covers pretty drug dealers, muggers etc

http://www.uk.sagepub.com/cross/file...5-Article3.pdf

[BrilloPad]

I don't think I would be comfortable leaving my child with someone who has a partner who has a conviction for sexually criminal behaviour. I say comfortable as in if that is known to me it will not happen.

I will qualify that by saying I don't think many teachers would be a partner of someone with a sexual criminal past.

So this new law (or new implementation) is purely designed to make parents feel more comfortable? There is no other basis besides that?

[minestrone]

I don't think I would be comfortable leaving my child with someone who has a partner who has a conviction for sexually criminal behaviour. I say comfortable as in if that is known to me it will not happen.

I will qualify that by saying I don't think many teachers would be a partner of someone with a sexual criminal past.

[BrilloPad]

If you were hiring someone for a role in a bank would you consider the partner of a convicted bank robber?

I think I would. As long as the partner has no access to the bank premises - which they would not.

What am I missing?

[minestrone]

If you were hiring someone for a role in a bank would you consider the partner of a convicted bank robber?

[BrilloPad]

yes

unfortunately yes, its the same for childminders.

it makes sense.

I am interested. Why does it make sense?

[BrilloPad]

I suppose it adds red tape admin jobs in the short term - but makes the UK totally noncompetitive in the long term.

In the article there is no justification whatsoever - I guess it relates to that Plymouth case where the woman was taking pictures on her mobile for her boyfriend. But this regulation would not have stopped that case - the issue there was banning mobile phones in child care centers.

I do remember in that case the bloke approached many many ladies on social media and got actively chatting to about 20. When he suggested child porn to those 20, but not one reported him - and 4 went ahead with his request. He was only caught as his work colleague got suspicious.

I suppose politicians need to be seen to be doing something - even when it does no good.

[vetran]

unfortunately yes, its the same for childminders.

it makes sense.

[minestrone]

yes

[xoggoth]

I certainly agree that anyone that convicted of certain crimes should be barred from any job connected with children or other vulnerable people but banning those who live with such a person?? The law gets sillier by the day.

Teachers to be barred for living with offenders under new rules - Education News - Education - The Independent

Heads and teachers will be barred from working in schools in future if they live with someone who has a conviction for a violent or sexual crime, according to new rules.