Parent volunteers and criminal records

[LdiJ]

You don't get out much, do you?

I was PTA president for my daughter's school for many years. I spent volunteer work hours in the school office, and even did a short temporary fill in stint on the school board. Nobody ever did background checks on parent volunteers.

My sister, aunt, grandmother, and several cousins are/were educators in various states and I have never heard any comments from any of them regarding doing background checks on parent volunteers...and since the shortage of parent volunteers is a subject that has been discussed, almost ad nauseum, I am sure that would have come up.

I am also highly familiar with public school budgets and once again, I have never seen budgeting available to do background checks on parent volunteers.

Do I dispute that there may be school districts out there that do that? No. Do I know that it would be a major expense that most public school districts are unlikely to be able to afford? Yes.

 

[Zigner]

Then I stand corrected. I need to remember that I live in California - we're much more anal about this sort of thing.

 

[LdiJ]

Then I stand corrected. I need to remember that I live in California - we're much more anal about this sort of thing.

CA is so different about so many things that its definitely confusing...

 

[Just Blue]

CA is so different about so many things that its definitely confusing...

I have been a volunteer at my children's various schools and have had a background search every year. As do all parental volunteers. But perhaps Massachusetts cares about the safety of their little ones more than other states.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

We had two tiers of volunteers - those who helped out ONLY under the guidance of a teacher or professional. The other tier had to go through finger printing background checks. If I had only did volunteering under the auspices of a teacher, I didn't have to bother with the background check. I wanted more, therefore, I went through the background check that **I** paid.

 

[TheGeekess]

I have been a volunteer at my children's various schools and have had a background search every year. As do all parental volunteers. But perhaps Massachusetts cares about the safety of their little ones more than other states.

Or maybe they're just more scared of lawsuits. Or paranoid.

 

[Humusluvr]

Being that the teacher is the licensed professional, who has had a background check, who will be "in charge" of the students - I know of few school districts who do background checks on the volunteers, because the volunteer would still be under the guidance of the teacher. If anything were to happen to the students, it would ultimately be the teacher held accountable.

HOWEVER - a volunteer is just that - an expendable, extra person. Who may be relieved of their volunteering duties at will. The teacher may very well tell the parent that their services are not needed, and the parent has no recourse to "demand their volunteering position." So, if the teacher gets a whiff of the parent's sordid past, they may ask the parent not to return. Simple as that.

Same reason the teacher could ask a creepy parent, a stinky parent, or a foul parent not to return. And that is perfectly within the professional teacher's rights. They do not HAVE to accept volunteers. And they may pick and choose the volunteers at will.

If BF/Father wants to volunteer, he may. However, he may be relieved of that volunteer position is the school hears of his checkered past. He may very well be an AWESOME volunteer - and the teacher may continue to utilize him. It's subjective, and up to the school to decide.

It is, what it is. He has the past. If his past haunts him, he will have to accept that. Can't blame the school for utilizing all the resources available to them. It would be similar to the school choosing not to use him if he posts pictures of himself drinking or acting up on Facebook. Your past - virtual or otherwise - can come back to haunt you.

 

[Just Blue]

Or maybe they're just more scared of lawsuits. Or paranoid.

Perhaps. Good for the children tho!

BTW...This is 20 years of checks. Not a "new" idea in my state.

I wish we had a "wicked cool" icon!!

 

[Zigner]

Being that the teacher is the licensed professional, who has had a background check, who will be "in charge" of the students - I know of few school districts who do background checks on the volunteers, because the volunteer would still be under the guidance of the teacher. If anything were to happen to the students, it would ultimately be the teacher held accountable.

I can guaran-dang-TEE that it's NOT the teacher that would ultimately be held accountable. It would be the school/district/et al.

 

[Just Blue]

Being that the teacher is the licensed professional, who has had a background check, who will be "in charge" of the students - I know of few school districts who do background checks on the volunteers, because the volunteer would still be under the guidance of the teacher. If anything were to happen to the students, it would ultimately be the teacher held accountable.

HOWEVER - a volunteer is just that - an expendable, extra person. Who may be relieved of their volunteering duties at will. The teacher may very well tell the parent that their services are not needed, and the parent has no recourse to "demand their volunteering position." So, if the teacher gets a whiff of the parent's sordid past, they may ask the parent not to return. Simple as that.

Same reason the teacher could ask a creepy parent, a stinky parent, or a foul parent not to return. And that is perfectly within the professional teacher's rights. They do not HAVE to accept volunteers. And they may pick and choose the volunteers at will.

If BF/Father wants to volunteer, he may. However, he may be relieved of that volunteer position is the school hears of his checkered past. He may very well be an AWESOME volunteer - and the teacher may continue to utilize him. It's subjective, and up to the school to decide.

It is, what it is. He has the past. If his past haunts him, he will have to accept that. Can't blame the school for utilizing all the resources available to them. It would be similar to the school choosing not to use him if he posts pictures of himself drinking or acting up on Facebook. Your past - virtual or otherwise - can come back to haunt you.

I agree. If the legal issues with OP "baby daddy" (I detest that term), are not imposing a harm to the children then the school may disregard.

 

[Humusluvr]

I can guaran-dang-TEE that it's NOT the teacher that would ultimately be held accountable. It would be the school/district/et al.

Yes, I agree. Teacher would be held accountable, school/district would be sued.

 

[Zigner]

Yes, I agree. Teacher would be held accountable, school/district would be sued.

That means the school/district would be held accountable. In fact, it's likely that the teacher wouldn't even have a reprimand unless it was something blatant.

 

[Humusluvr]

That means the school/district would be held accountable. In fact, it's likely that the teacher wouldn't even have a reprimand unless it was something blatant.

Because teaching has become such a "highly sued" profession, most teachers carry liability insurance. Which means THEY are named in the lawsuits. If the money is there, the person suing goes for the biggest pot they can collect from. Teachers often carry $1 million liability insurance, while schools - in the case of death or dismemberment - carry liability insurance over $20 million.

 

[Willlyjo]

That means the school/district would be held accountable. In fact, it's likely that the teacher wouldn't even have a reprimand unless it was something blatant.

Unbelievable! How can you say that it is likely a teacher would not be reprimanded in a situation where a school/district would be held accountable for the teacher's behavior/actions? Also, your post here is a little ambiguous/confusing.

 

[Humusluvr]

Unbelievable! How can you say that it is likely a teacher would not be reprimanded in a situation where a school/district would be held accountable for the teacher's behavior/actions? Also, your post here is a little ambiguous/confusing.

Let's say there is a field trip to the zoo. The teacher has a class of 20 students, and three parent volunteers. BF in question is one of those volunteers.

BF takes 5 of the students to the male bathroom. Teacher takes 5 female students to bathroom. One of the boys sneaks out, and falls into a bear enclosure, while BF is checking phone. Student dies.

Teacher would be held "accountable" but likely would not be reprimanded. She would have been enable to forsee that BF volunteer would be irresponsible taking children to restroom. But child was ultimately under her care. School pays for death of child. Teacher is allowed to continue teaching, and not reprimanded.

There are a lot of situations where the teacher could be held responsible, but not reprimanded. It would be her "fault" for not supervising the child, and the school carries liability insurance for just this reason.

This is one of the main reasons that schools have limited or cut out field trips completely. And limited volunteers. Too many variables.