Child being questioned in school

[StuntmanMike]

TankRizzo said:

Devil2575 said:

insults

Contributions from you in the last few threads you've posted in:

Devil2575 said:

Have you ever considered that you should just shut the fk up?

Devil2575 said:

Wow, you really are a proper weapons grade bellend aren't you.

Devil2575 said:

Is it that you are a big tt perhaps?

Devil2575 said:

Wow. You're a bit of a tt aren't you.

Oh and you're also talking complete bks.

Devil2575 said:

You really are a proper bellend aren't you.

Perhaps time to consider your posting style...?

How do you do the multi thread quote thing?

[liner33]

Fab32 said:

Sure


As the designated safeguarding person for your organisation you should not be conducting safeguarding enquires and certainly should not be inviting parents and adults in for meetings if their are safeguarding concerns.

Also explaining to the child the concerns before speaking with them is not a good idea.

However, personally I don't feel that the colleagues of another employee should be carrying out any kind of safeguarding investigation , the situation is toxic to both parties

[Derek Smith]

Fab32 said:

Sure

As the designated safeguarding person for your organisation you should not be conducting safeguarding enquires and certainly should not be inviting parents and adults in for meetings if their are safeguarding concerns.

Also explaining to the child the concerns before speaking with them is not a good idea.

I'm not sure if you fully understand the role of a safeguarding officer at a sports club.

I follow the requirements of the sports administration body. To the letter I might add. It's not just DBS checks you know.

I also can't think why the procedures of a hearing should not be explained to the child and his parents/adults beforehand. Are you suggesting they should come as a surprise? With permission of the parents, everyone present at a hearing will introduce themselves to the child and parents before everything starts.

The military set of guidelines are more restrictive on procedures with children. My sport body is working on ways for us to comply completely.

[Fab32]

Derek Smith said:

Fab32 said:

Sure

As the designated safeguarding person for your organisation you should not be conducting safeguarding enquires and certainly should not be inviting parents and adults in for meetings if their are safeguarding concerns.

Also explaining to the child the concerns before speaking with them is not a good idea.

I'm not sure if you fully understand the role of a safeguarding officer at a sports club.

I follow the requirements of the sports administration body. To the letter I might add. It's not just DBS checks you know.

I also can't think why the procedures of a hearing should not be explained to the child and his parents/adults beforehand. Are you suggesting they should come as a surprise? With permission of the parents, everyone present at a hearing will introduce themselves to the child and parents before everything starts.

The military set of guidelines are more restrictive on procedures with children. My sport body is working on ways for us to comply completely.

Re the roles in sports clubs, you're right I don't, but I imagine they are all different anyway. However the role of lead for safeguarding is generic when it come to children to a point.

In a previous post you use the terminology of "enquiry" but in this one say "hearing"

It seems odd that your club (what is it by the way?) would choose to take advice from the military when your local authority will have a safeguarding board who provide advice.

let me ask you what you would do if a child showed you a bruise and said his mother did it. Would you hold an enquiry or hearing then?

[voyds9]

StuntmanMike said:

How do you do the multi thread quote thing?

With multiple uses of ctrl+C and crtl+V and many windows open, a clear head and repeated use of preview window.

And after all that I still get it wrong.

[Jasandjules]

Fab32 said:

let me ask you what you would do if a child showed you a bruise and said his mother did it. Would you hold an enquiry or hearing then?

I would suspect that a right thinking person would be looking to involve the police at that point, or social services. Most people do not believe that they are Sherlock Holmes nor that they have the right to hold and question children absent their consent and the consent of their parent or guardian. I hope.

However this situation would appear to be rather different, as it was pertaining to the mother's work and the child was not volunteering information but being detained against their wishes to be interrogated (on the information we have). This is why I suspect it is pushing into criminal conduct on the part of the teachers in question, unlawful detention..

[liner33]

Jasandjules said:

I would suspect that a right thinking person would be looking to involve the police at that point, or social services. Most people do not believe that they are Sherlock Holmes nor that they have the right to hold and question children absent their consent and the consent of their parent or guardian. I hope.

However this situation would appear to be rather different, as it was pertaining to the mother's work and the child was not volunteering information but being detained against their wishes to be interrogated (on the information we have). This is why I suspect it is pushing into criminal conduct on the part of the teachers in question, unlawful detention..

Absolutely, it becomes inappropriate when its referring to an incident with a member of staff and their own child.

As mentioned before the LA have help and support and ultimate responsibility for safeguarding they should be involved not the school.