There’s no one more than me that wants to stop the abuse of children and adults. I’m sure I’m up there with every Liberal Democrat in this.
So why do I feel extremely uneasy at the new puritanism that is being unleashed in our society.
I refer to the excellent posting by Alison Wheeler.
I checked the ISA Independent Safeguarding Authority’s website to check what the definitions would be – you know proper case studies and examples – of what or who they would consider on the margins of being cleared.
Obviously those that have had convictions for abuse are barred. What’s really important is we also SAFEGUARD the rights of the individual and weigh a proper balance. Take for example the person in Alison Wheeler’s blog who happens to be in a more alternative relationship. I have no idea what that has to do with her potential as a social worker (perhaps Lynne Featherstone would like to tell me!)
You see I get worried as I can’t find anything on the ISA website. Will they make it up as they go along?
This also gets into the thorny issue of the t’internet. What happens if on a `register-only`Gay, swingers or BDSM website where you have to put name and address and sometimes pay money before you enter (even if you hide your `pictures` until someone asks for them) and find that that picture (of you being spanked perhaps) is given as proof as to your unsuitability to do your job? I can imagine if these definitions aren’t tightened up people being blackmailed or prurient people searching sites to see what they can find.
So I’m asking on this website whether those who know more than me can tell me what the SAFEGUARDS are for INDIVIDUALS? What are the definitions and boundaries for Enhanced checks? Or is it yet another Labour scheme to appease their prurient hardcore supporters?