My partner is hoping to become a guitar teacher, self-employed: but has been told she can't get a CRB check unless she joins an agency for the self-employed. I got my check through school as I work as a peri. How do other self-employed people go about getting checked?

There are already a couple of threads on that matter, I'm sure they can still be found somewhere.

You don't necessarily need a CRB Check as a self-employed teacher. None of my students' parents ever asked me for one, and I've never had any problems (although I mainly teach adults), but I have a fair amount of teens).

If you still want to go for one, you have to do it through an umbrella-organisaton like Soundsense ...

True, you don't need one, but these days everyone that is serious about teaching anything to children does.

As to where to get one from, I believe that your local Police station can help you, though generally yes, they're done through an acknowledged signatory.

.

Aaaaaand I think I'll agree...

Don't have it, never been asked for it, hadn't heard of it till I started posting on this forum, (still not sure what it stands for) and I've been teaching 10 years! [In fact, more now I come to think of it...I really need to do my tax...]

"CRB" stands for Criminal Records Bureau. It's a check to see if you've ever been in trouble with the police, and records things from cautions to prison sentences. I have to do them all the time for new staff recruited to care for vulnerable adults.

I have one for my "main" job, but not for my teaching.

If you want to get one done, we use the Civil & Corporate Agency. They have a website if you want to check them out, Madge.

I don't think that its true, I know that its true! Sorry if that sounds arrrogant but that is the way that it is.

Many music teachers will have one-on-one lessons with children with no witnesses. My teacher does. These days with paranoia (if it is paranoia, I don't know), you can't be in that sitaution without a CRB.



They probably assume you've got one (because everyone has) and therefore don't think to ask.

I have two: one for Coaching and one for work. I can't actually do either without them. My Coaching one is always with me when I'm Coaching for parents of prospective new students to see.



They are worth very little, that's entirely true. The great fallacy of them, for just the reason you mentioned.





Exactly the point. Any organistion that you join will insist on it.



That's a contradiction.



Absolutely. If you have anything to do with children, you need enhanced disclosure. I would have thought it possible to use ABRSM as an umbrella if you're teaching "for" them.



It doesn't make you a different person, but arguably it makes you less responsible. We are reaching a point where if yours isn't on display, parents will wonder what sort of paedophile you are and go elsewhere. I know its extreme, but that's our society for you.

I've just resigned from the committee of my local music festival over this issue - we were suddenly told that in order to continue being on the committee (which I've been on for about 10 or 15 years) we would all have to be CRB checked. I find this HUGELY and personally insulting - I've given my time and expertise to the festival free of charge for so many years (as have the others, of course), and now to be treated like a potential criminal is really out of order, I think ! I know that any check would come back completely clear, but it's the principle of the thing......in any case, minors and vulnerable adults are not left at the Festival by themselves, because they are supposed to have someone with them at all times.

It's all becoming absolutely ridiculous - the next thing we know, we'll be told that the organisers of Forum concerts will have to be checked because we have a few under 18s attending, even though they are with an adult

It's a big money-maker for someone, that's for sure........

Sorry if I sound arrogant, I'm just trying to give an honest reply. Yes, that is what I'm suggesting. Everyone that teaches kids should have one, ESPECIALLY if you do so without witnesses.



Anyone that knows anything about them knows not to have any faith in them, that's certainly true. But that's not the point. Still to have than not have.



I live in a small town wre everyone knows everyone. I suspect I'm undirectly related to half the town. I'm well known and trusted, probably largely due to my parents. My old man's lived here all his life. Its not a case of short-sightedness, its a case of general national paranoia (or not), exagerated by the media. Often the way.

These days. CRBs are not a luxury, they're a basic necessity.





I'm sorry, that's not my intent. Please remember that I too am a teacher (well "Coach", actually), allbeit not of music.

I don't want to insult anyone, but I do wholeheartedly stand by my comments.

Your reaction is quite justified, but that line in itself you would think covers the need for all this PC nonsense. I would be quite hurt as well.



At one point our band had about 50 adults and one 17 year old oboist (gone to royal college). What if we start imposing such measures on groups like these. Next thing you know adults would need CRBed just to play in a band with under 18s.



Absolutely, not least doing millions of duplicates for each so and so body.

In answer to the original question, the MU have plans in place to get CRBs for members, but I don't bother. I have several from various authorities. Some say it's good to know I've been cleared, but most don't mind.

And yet 'everyone' apparently hasn't. By a long chalk.

Fair point.

I've not yet met a parent who automatically thinks a teacher is a paedophile if they don't have a CRB, but does current society thinking make it more problematic for men who are teachers than women?

We sometimes have a tendancy to forget that paedophilia (like domestic abuse) is not new, it has been going on for centuries. In more recent years however, it has been thrown into the media circus-ring for all to see - and quite rightly so, but perhaps an offshoot of this is a more paranoid society amongst adults.

From my own experience, children in general tend to be far more assertive (even rude or pretentious) these days than when I was a child, but, has that assertiveness also tended to get them into trouble? They are 'green' and easily led, but when their eagerness to prove themselves or to be 'adult' leads to a sticky situation, their immaturity leaves them frightened and unable to deal with it. So, has assertiveness increased, but streetwise ability decreased? When I was young I didn't have a computer, or a mobile phone. We went out with friends, but we didn't hang around street corners until after dark, because we knew that was when 'odd people' crept out and might try to take advantage of us. We didn't talk to strangers whatever the time of day and we said 'no' and walked away if anyone offered us a lift, or tried to bribe us with sweets. These days some children, particularly young teenage girls, almost ask for trouble with the way they behave. The actually challenge the situation! Granted there will also be the innocent children who are simply green and too trusting, and end up in trouble because of it.

I hold an enhanced disclosure CRB, but I've never yet been challenged by a parent to produce it. Most of the private (child) pupils I teach will be left alone in a room with me. Some of those who I visit are occasionally left in my sole care while the parent nips out for 5 minutes to the shop. Granted, the latter are pupils I have taught for a number of years, but I think keeping an open dialogue and building a mutual respect and trust with the parent, and pupil, is essential.

Have any male teachers on this forum found a different attitude is taken towards them?

Paedophilia is at least as prevelant in women if not more. The difference is men are taken to court for it, and women are admired for showing affection/motherly instincts, touching when appropriate etc, unless of course they actually abuse a child.

I'm just back from a meeting with my music service where the director mentioned even the most backroom staff in the Education department are getting CRBed 'just in case' they come into contact with pupils. Also the problem that if someone is off you can't bring a dep in who hasn't been cleared by the same authority. It really is getting out of hand.

As I said earlier, I have never been asked to show a Disclosure too parents, though they all know I work for music services, which kind of shows I must be cleared (though I could be lying about that too I suppose).

Has anyone scientifically proved men are naturally more sick minded towards children. Unless anyone has (and I'd love to hear how), it means nothing.

Why does this argument always have to come up? It should not make any difference whether men or women are more likely to abuse children, in both cases it is terrible and horrifying. If a woman does so, she should be locked away. I really don't think taking this direction again is necessary ...

Anyway, here a website you might find interesting, although it might not be of any value for you since it is concentrated on the female point of view. It was one of the first to show up, it is surely not the best statistic you can find, but I really cannot be bothered putting 300 links in here . But if you use google, you will find all sorts of statistics, and sadly they all go in a similar direction, probably one you won't like.

http://www.womenssupportproject.co.uk/file...searchonCSA.pdf

Still: It wasn't the question whether men or women are more likely to abuse, but if a CRB check is needed and where to get it. If someone feels the need to get one although it is NOT necessary, they should. Maybe it makes themselves sleep better. Fact is that the vast majority of teachers, both male and female, are normal and should be trusted. And I really doubt that a CRB check makes any difference, especially not basic police checks, since they really have NO value on that matter.

This all just shows how paranoid the society we live in is, and I don't intend to participate, sorry. If that makes me "arguably" less reliable or responsible, I would find it ridiculous and sad at the same time, but I'll probably have to live with it. Still: No parents EVER asked me for a disclosure, so I seriously doubt it will ...

I have 5 or 6 CRB checks!!!! I have one for scouts, one for a camp for 15-17 year olds I run, one at the school I teach (peri) in, one from the school where I used to classroom teach, umm.... one for the school of which I am a Governor, one at church.... the list continues....
I do think parents presume you have a CRB check... it is standard these days. The camp I run, even our tent leaders who do camp one week a year have to have this CRB.
I've had a friend staying this weekend and I was encouraging her to allow her daughter to take up the clarinet. (I gave her a 'lesson' and she was pretty good). The daughter doesn't want lessons at school (she doesn't want to miss PE and Art), so I was encouraging her to find a private teacher (she lives in Kent). The mother said "But I have to leave my child in a perfect staranger's house... how do I know they're ok?"
I know she can't know... but a CRB would put her mind at rest a little.

The thing that annoys me is that every organisation I have a CRB with has had to pay for it. Couldn't there be an easier way of these organisations checking on my suitability to work with children?
As a parent, I expect that the leaders of the drama club my son attends would have CRB's... I would be shocked to find they weren't (even though I've never asked). My children's music teachers have all taught in schools... I know they'll have them from that... but I've never asked. I know scout and guide organisations are very strict about CRB's.

The sad, sad, sad thing is... when my son did Bugsy Malone at the end of term, it was thought better for myself and another CRB checked mother to look after the older boys dressing room (the boys went up to 16) than a man (CRB checked or not). So these boys (10-16) had to change while we were in the dressing room... and for quick changes we had to help them but apparently we are more acceptable than a male.

Oh yeah... and parents would expect you to have a CRB as they know to even help as a parent in the classroom or to help out on a school trip you need a CRB these days!!! So if you are having 1:1 contact with their child, they would kind of presume you had the check...

I quite agree with you, David . And I refuse to believe that people in general nowadays are any worse than they ever were. Whatever happened to trust? The scaremongers simply try to twist everyone and everything to their own misguided 'do-goodish' (but really, more harm than good) way of thinking.....

When I was a child, my brother and I often 'played out', and there was a lady living over the road who used to drop sweets down for us from her upstairs window. We thought she was kind, our parents thought she was kind - it's sad to think that nowadays this sort of simple act might have been viewed with suspicion

What's wrong with meeting the prospective teacher and deciding whether you think they are someone you would feel ok with?
It might be possible to get a recommendation from other students/parents and you can always ask to sit in the first few lessons while the child gets settled with the teacher (and you feel happy).
Some teachers now insist on children having an adult with them during lessons because of the degree of mistrust there is around.

I think it's all a bit one-sided. While I agree that everything possible has to be done to make sure the children are safe, what about us teachers who have to let perfect strangers into our homes in order to earn a living. We have to rely on our gut instincts don't we??!!

I'm glad though that I have an enhanced CRB from when I was doing a PGCE a few years ago. The university paid for it. Otherwise I guess I wouldn't have one or be able to get one as a private teacher

I think that they are only'valid' for about 3 years..... if you are in a job or other position that needs one you have to get a new one then.

That's the whole dilemma about it. An old CRB check is simply useless, so much could have happened meanwhile. But of course you can still get a new one, even if you are self-employed - you just have to pay for it yourself and go through an organisation like Soundsense or others.

As for the other mentioned fact: Exactly. I am letting complete strangers into my house, I am a woman, my partner is not always in. So do I have to ask each man coming to my lessons for a CRB check now? After all, at least half of them could be rapists
Or each woman coming to my house could be a psycho, trying to rob and murder me.

Of course I don't, if I even thought like that, I wouldn't be a private teacher.

So private teachers have to trust all the strangers they let into their houses, but parents can't trust teachers? Strange world ...

Technically, they are "invalid" the second they are printed! Just as a car could pass its MOT then have something fall off in between the test center and home, you could also be arrested the day of your CRB print!

Despite my earlier comments, I never said the system was perfect. Also the point about needing one per activity rather than just one is very reasonable, hence me having two (work and Coaching)

Yes - but I think it's okay at the moment. I think you just need another if you change job. It wouldn't bother me too much if I had to apply for another CRB. I think it was only £12 back in 2002.



Even so statistics have shown that attacks on women are by people they already know. Staying aware is probably one way to stay safe - and that goes for the children as well as adults. If parents think that a piece of paper is going to protect them, how will the children know how to cope if a difficult situation arises. Surely it is up to the adults to educate as far as possible. I have never, ever forgotten when I was at school the endless mantra - 'never talk to strangers, accept lifts or sweets' etc. We learnt common-sense. Trouble is I'm still telling my husband not to answer the door to strangers and to lock-up at night !! He was born into an era when everyone left their back-doors open and leant over fences chatting to each other

On the other hand - anyone out there who intended to be a 'baddie' might get warned off trying for jobs they shouldn't, because they might get found out, knowing they wouldn't pass the CRB.

Going through an umbrella organisation, some of whom charge an extra £10 for admin, it comes to close to £50 for an enhanced CRB!

'Admin' - the cost of an envelope and a stamp £50 is shocking !

On the other hand - anyone out there who intended to be a 'baddie' might get warned off trying for jobs they shouldn't, because they might get found out, knowing they wouldn't pass the CRB.
[/quote]


That, apparently, is most of the point of CRB checks. You are right that a determined person could get one anyway, but apparently most people who "shouldn't"have a CRB back out from applying for a job when it states that a CRB is necessary. It works as a preventative measure.... not a perfect measure ... and maybe there is a better system. However, it is the system in place in this country.
I don't think parents have stopped warning their children not to accept lifts from strangers etc. I think most parents are aware that CRB's are JUST ONE way of trying to prevent abuse. But wouldn't it be awful if the camp I run, accepted a person to be a tent leader who was a convicted child abuser because we didn't get a CRB?

I agree our world is too suspicious and I know CRB checks are not the complete answer... but they are not useless if they keep some people away from working with children. I don't know all the people who help at my daughter's gym club... but I do know that they are all CRB checked. I know that doesn't give me complete security... nothing can... bar me spending all of my time with my children... and that would stunt their development...and send me mad....but I know the gymnastics association insists on these standards... and that's the best I can hope for. For the rest of my children's security, I have to rely on their common sense and stuff I hope I have instilled into them...But at least I know that the gym club has done everything they can do to ensure my child's safety.

Well. The Church has just asked me for a CRB Check, because I'll be playing music at the new youth service. The same Church that has watched me grow up! Yet if I was part of the congregation, havng far more contact with the younger kids, I wouldn't need one. The system is crazy!

I think David and those with similar views are quite right . Here the CRB doesn't exist and as far as I know there is nothing similar. If any parent asked me for any such kind of security check I would simply tell them to take their custom elsewhere. There may be people who think that is irresponsible. I think it is far more irresponsible to damage on a large scale the trust and respect without which society cannot fucntion. That is what has happened - because there are some untrustworthy people we are all suspected.

It reminds me of some of the things said on the thread about driving - punishing and blaming everyone for the misdemeanours of a few.

I've got an even better idea. I think every expectant mother and father should be security screened before they are actually allowed to have a child. Next I think they should have their IQ's tested and not be allowed to reproduce unless they are above average. Of course I don't believe a word of these last two sentences but I do want to wake people up to what sort of a society we are producing.

I raised this issue about obtaining a CRB check only 2-3 weeks ago. In the next couple of months I am going to start teaching the piano on a self employed basis. As I will more than likely teach a child I was not sure If I needed a CRB check or not. I found out that you don't have to obtain one. I checked with the criminal records bureau and found out that individuals that are self employed were unable to obtain a CRB check themselves which is a nuisance. Instead we have to obtain one from an 'umbrella organisation'.

Anyway, following responses from other teachers on this forum Ive decided not to get a CRB check unless I get parents that frequently ask me if I have one. I wouldn't be insulted if they asked me as I understand that parents are more aware of these things nowdays and that they may want peace of mind etc.

If any parents have any issues regarding leaving their child on their own under my supervision then I will offer them to sit in on their childs lesson.

What's more crazy - you'd still need one even if you were only coming into contact with people older than yourself but still under the age of 18. And the age at which people need to be CRB checked before they can work with young people? From 7 upwards .

I thought the age of criminal responsibility was 10?? Therefore, how can a 7 year old have a criminal record even if they deserve one??

'Crazy' as it may seem one has to make a decision one way or the other on this topic. The very same people who are saying it's crazy that society has lost trust etc. will also be the people saying 'how was this allowed to happen?' if a known offender gets a job with children and reoffends whilst doing that job. So you can either say yes these checks are necessary; or you have no comeback to complain at anyone that an offender was allowed to get a job. The only way to be sure if anyone has a criminal record is to check.

There seems to be a general concensus of 'I am a great judge of character and would be able to spot a paedophile through talking to them'. The fact is one can't, well known, well liked and respected people have been later found to be paedophiles. Most offences are by people who are trusted by parents and know the children well (or are even family members or the parents themselves), so it is clearly not necessarily the case that one can 'tell' by a judging the character. Again I'm not saying we should suspect everyone everywhere, that wouldn't be healthy, but we either have to decide to trust everyone or to trust no one when it comes to official checks: many of the people are later caught doing these things would most probably have been waived through with a 'no check necessary' because I know them'.... Indeed most people we get to know we decide are okay, and to be honest every single person reading this message who has assumed everyone they've met, or left their children with, to not be a paedophile has almost certainly been 100% right on every judgement they've made about this, it's quite rare that someone will be.

I'm not trying to stir up hysteria about this, simply pointing out that it's hypocritical to turn around and say measures should have been in place to stop this if one isn't willing for everyone to go through the checks. One can't say I should be exempt because I know I've not done it; I'm sure someone who has done it would like for themselves to be exempt too. Of course the checks aren't faultless, but they're not designed to be so: they're to prevent known offenders from getting jobs; all that a 'safe' check means is that the person hasn't been caught for offending yet. It's not intended to mean that the person is safe, it's merely a sensible head nod to check that they're not unsafe; and of course to cover the employer's liability.

But the problem is that an self employed individual who wants to get a CRB check before working with children can't without paying £10 - £15 over the cost to an umbrella organisation to get it processed.
Either they want people working with children to have one or they don't, not one rule for the employed and another for the self employed.

So what next? CRB all adults who play in a band with under 18s, not at all uncommon (brass/wind bands come to mind), or ban under 18s. University lecturers, for anyone still 17 for a few weeks in first year or impose a minimum age of 18 for students. All shop staff in case a child comes in? To walk through a street frequented by children as the easiest route home. Madness!

Sometimes I wonder if the system is its own worst enemy. We didn't used to have it here and there was no big problem. Other countries still don't have it, and are in no hurry to. Is the whole system simply raising suspicion rather than preventing it (oh, you need checked for so and so to cross paths with children)WHY should everyone assume an adult is a threat to under 18s until proved otherwise.

Making some attempt to answer the original post, why should private teachers feel in an awkward position because of the hysteria going on. And yes, WE are also inviting strangers into our house (or visiting them). Even being male and in my parents' house, I still worry slightly first time and even for a time after. It works both ways.

As far as I know at the moment everyone in a band/team doesn't need CRB clearance.
My husband is involved in local league cricket and if they have minors in the team they have to have a welfare officer and probably the captain with clearance. If they have any coaches they also need a CRB.
Apparently there has been talk about requiring every adult in the team to be cleared but if this happens then I can see it meaning the end of a lot of teams/bands who have both children and adult members both for practical and financial reasons.
This would be a shame as different generations can gain so much from playing (sport and music) together.

It's certainly the way things are going in the Church of England. For years I was a church bellringer - my husband still is - and ringers have been put under suspicion because of the church's expectation that they, as members of an all-age activity, will subject themselves to CRB clearance, as members of other all-age activities, such as choirs, are expected to do.

However, the church has displayed no knowledge of the normal practice of ringers, which is to attend practices, and often service ringing, at churches other than their own home tower, so as to help out other bands of ringers, and to increase their own ringing time to mor than twice a week. Expecting them to have a separate CRB clearance for any church they might ring at is unrealistic. And then then ringers are asked what they have to hide because they have expressed disquiet.

In my opinion most of this is a knee-jerk reaction against mistakes the churches have made in the past. And those who will suffer most? Under-18s, who will be increasingly excluded from activities because it is becoming too complicated, expensive and time-consuming to include them.

CRB checks are currently required for people employed in a position of authority over people under the age of 18. For instance, checkout operators don't need CRB clearance to work alongside 16-year old checkout operators; but the store manager, to whom the checkout operators are subordinate, does need CRB clearance. Work experience students need CRB clearance in the classroom because they are in a position of authority for the week; but schoolchildren do not need CRB clearance to sit in a class with people under 18 because they hold no authority.



University lecturers are CRB cleared, particularly in Scotland where students routinely start at 17. Post-grad students working as tutors should also be CRB checked, technically, but rarely are.



Not in authority over customers; indeed, the customer is boss .



Not a professional capacity - it's far easier to legislate for business than for people's private lives. Besides, we'd have to keep all ### offenders in jail forever if we never wanted them to even see a child.


So suppose we remove this legislation so anyone can get a job with children. A person with a history of child ### offences gets a job in a school, no on asks about their history because it's not required (and they deem them to seem 'nice enough'). Suppose now that they re-offend directly abusing their position to do so. What would you say then? Surely your response would be 'this is absurd, why didn't anyone check?'. I very much doubt it would be 'well at least we saved some time not bothering to do those millions of other checks on innocent people we otherwise would have had to do'.



Even the OU, on courses where tutors won't ever meet their students, in the case where a student is under 18....



We're more legislated, generally. However, are you arguing that the safeguards are a bad thing? Think like a manager - if you could check whether someone had committed ### offences in the past before placing them in authority over children, thereby covering your behind, would you not do so? Think as a parent - would you rather a school checked the teachers, before placing your child in their care?

We know other countries don't check, but that doesn't mean they or we are right. The only way to discuss this properly is to answer the following key question directly - if the checks were not done, and someone re-offended, directly abusing their position to do so, what would you say then?

I myself am still a child, yet I will be working with young people possible older than myself. Should they be CRB checked incase they pose a threat to me? Surely the most sensible thing to do would be to put the offenders in a jail (shock horror!) so that they have no chance to be near children. End of problem, at least for known offenders, which is all a CRB can check for. Otherwise you could CRB everyone in the country in case they saw a kid walking home.

The measure that should be in place to prevent instances of child abuse is I think commonly known as Justice.



I didn't have a CRB check to do my work experience. And just because they officially held no authority over me doesn't mean that they couldn't do me harm - You wouldn't believe the number of lewd comments that get passed in a classroom.

My post was mostly in sarcasm as the situations I mention are indeed ludicrous, though I am a bit shocked it does apply to higher education institutions, but



Similar to APs point and quite true BUT it used to be able to happen in this country, it could still happen in other countries (read Aquarelle's post), so who's right (or wrong). Unless 21st century brits are unusually predatory human beings (and I'm kidding on so don't take it seriously!)

If you'd been caught doing something you shouldn't have been, the headteacher would then have been liable for negligence. I'm not sure if jail would be involved. It was a headteacher who told me about this, as they'd been told by their union to make sure they did it.



Yes, but again, it's only practically possible to legislate people in employment (paid or unpaid) without infringing on civil liberties. If one was to place the same restrictions on people's private lives, all ### offenders would need to be in jail permanently as they couldn't be allowed to walk down the street because they might meet children, or to buy food from a shop etc. Whether or not ### offenders should be kept in jail for life, and whether they are bound to reoffend or not, is another debate.



Even the OU, on courses where tutors won't ever meet their students, in the case where a student is under 18....



We're more legislated, generally. However, are you arguing that the safeguards are a bad thing? Think like a manager - if you could check whether someone had committed ### offences in the past before placing them in authority over children, thereby covering your behind, would you not do so? Think as a parent - would you rather a school checked the teachers, before placing your child in their care?

We know other countries don't check, but that doesn't mean they or we are right. The only way to discuss this properly is to answer the following key question directly - if the checks were not done, and someone re-offended, directly abusing their position to do so, what would you say then?

No, just a pain in the proverbial for the cost, time, suspicion of people asked to do them, self employed who can't and feel under suspicion. At least a central system would be so much easier than one every place we go to.

Just to throw more salt into the pot, on the issue of 'position of authority', what about school prefects? (not true authority as such but where do you draw the line?)

No, I would certainly not be saying "How was this allowed to happen?". A first offender doesn't have a criminal record until he / she is caught and found guilty. Once that has happened it is up to the powers that be to see that the offender is tightly accompanied in his / her reinsertion into society once the sentence has been purged. There are plenty of ways and means to prevent further offences - electronic bracelets, weekly reporting to a competent authority (who could perfectly well monitor the kind of job the offender has), medical treatment (we should not forget that many sexual offenders recognise that they desperatly need help), compulsory group therapy - I'm sure the experts can come up with a lot more.

The money wasted on the production of thousands of meaningless bits of paper - in circumstances like those of the bell ringers and others (see various posts above) could be far better spent dealing with the actual offenders. Leave the rest of us out of it.

Frankly I think this hysteria is engendering a most unhealthy attitude. I wouldn't be suprised if some children grow up thinking all adults are child predators. They might even begin to think it's normal and the great game is to be one and not get caught.

Having to get your "I am clean and innocent" certificate is a ruse. It deflects from the real solution to the problem. It also puts in writing, via a third party, an insulting question which few people would have the nerve to ask openly and verbally of any teacher. I'm just waiting for the parent who actually opens his / her mouth says to me "Are you a child abuser?"

The worry is the generation that are being brought up with minimal physical contact. I used to train with a girl (in sports) that was training to be a school teacher. This was ten years ago and she was then pointing out the problem. A young child falls over in the playground. Whats the best first aid? A cuddle. Now we arn't allowed or are afraid to.

My job involves physical contact with people, children included. My Coaching involves physical contact with people, children included. Its a nightmare.

Hi all

Not on thread, just an aside....Just back from holiday in Northern Spain where my two blond boys were fussed over, fed lollipops, got their hair ruffled at least once on every street they walked down, were greeted and chatted to by adults everywhere they went, were taken onto the knee of the local chef while he supervised his kitchen.... I realise what we - and they - have lost. All we have got in exchange are suspicion minds.

H

Amen to that.

Ain't that the truth? Thinking of the recent thread about someone who's not allowed to teach many hours in their self-contained, soundproof extension, as opposed to the folks over the road from me currently playing music at decibels which must be ensuring them a middle age of saying "What? Sorry, I didn't catch that..."

Re: the lack of trust: my sister-in-law yesterday in the park was approached by a child of about 2 or 3 who said she had "lost her mummy". Claire knelt down to speak to her, and the child clambered up into her lap for a cuddle. Poor Claire was in the unenviable position of wishing to help and comfort the child (who clearly wanted a cuddle - Claire peeled her off several times but she grabbed every opportunity to cling back on) without incurring the wrath of the missing parent. As it turned out, the mum seemed singularly unconcerned that she'd lost her little girl, let alone that she was with Claire, but it's a sad time when a frightened child can't get a hug At our chapel holiday club, which finished today, children regularly climb up on the helpers' laps - two of them today fell asleep on helpers. It would be a dreadful shame if we helpers had to push the kids off and tell them they weren't allowed.

Interestingly, in the park yesterday I ended up having a chat with a woman who was walking her 10-month-old round. Twice, she thrust him into my arms for a cuddle. I'm not sure it's necessarily wise to hand one's child to a perfect stranger, but it was a lovely example that even in our over legislated country, trust still exists.

You must just have looked particularly trustworthy!

I do quite a bit of work in church and, yes, we're all CRB checked and, courtesy of that, I have a CRB, albeit not as a private teacher per se, which if parents of my students ask to see, I show them (and some have asked). The knock-on effect of all of this though has been that some activities at my church no longer run that used to, because either the adults won't get CRB checked or the paperwork for all the parental permissions has become too daunting and, of course, that is very sad. We used to have an inter-church choirs festival in my area full of children but none come now, partly because few are singing anyway but the choir directors of those that do, can't face all the paperwork the RSCM requires now for such events.

It's easy to get hysterical about this but the other side of the coin is that, as teachers, it does help to protect us as well as the children. Kids are more brash, prepared to hit the headlines with wild accusations etc these days. Sadly, of course, we do know of cases of private music teachers and seemingly worthy people in our churches who've committed some nasty things in their time.

However, I sometimes wonder whether our "keep-at-arms-length" policies regarding adults and children are not, in some small way, a little responsible for the troubles with our young people today. Adults have become so wary of working with them (at least socially so) and the lack of physical contact with smaller children when they are in need, encourages coldness and hostility in my view.

For now, however, I shall continue to get my CRB clearance and be content to do so for my own peace of mind, never mind anyone else. Sorry for a slightly rambling response - I'm tired.

I will finally get a disclosure check now because I need it for something else that turned up the last days. No chance I guess

No, seriously: The "arms length" thing is terrible and unhealthy, completely with oboist on that matter. I literally cannot teach singing without touching the student every now and again. I can say two hundred times: "Left shoulder down" or something like that, but it always ends up being too high or too low and takes ages until in the right position. How much easier and quicker is it to just put the shoulder where it is supposed to be with my hands?
How far fetched is it to think of posture or breathing correction as something indecent? And how sick is it to get scared of perfectly normal things as a student AND teacher? Do we really want to contribute to this by accepting every rubbish and just always do what other people tell us without questioning it?

Just a thought ...

I guess! I was really touched!