Child abuse safeguards - don't celebrate too soon

This mornings British Sunday newspapers are awash with stories that the proposed controversial "vetting and barring" scheme designed to protect children from abusive adults will be considerably watered down.

One of the more balance reports appears in the Observer, others in the right wing press are more celebratory seeing this as a blow to the "politically correct nanny state".

The Observer reports:

Laws forcing the 11 million people who help out in schools and nurseries to undergo criminal record checks to prove they are not paedophiles are to be dropped following a massive outcry.

In a major government U-turn, Ed Balls, the schools secretary, has bowed to public opinion and will announce tomorrow that the controversial vetting and barring scheme, due to be introduced next July, will be dramatically watered down.

His decision follows a storm of protest over the summer, when it emerged that parents who take children to sports events or drive them around on behalf of scout groups would be among those subject to checks.

The "watered down" proposals come after a review by the former Dr Banardos Chief Executive, Sir Roger Singleton, who has always struck me as being a very safe pair of hands. I believe his recommendations would be based on common sense.

However I'm not joining the right wing celebrations. Having worked in the statutory social services and the Methodist run National Children's Home (now Action for Children), I've come across several people who have turned out to be child abusers. On first sight they are very impressive, very committed workers, however after a period of time the truth would come out and it appears that their interest in children's work sprung from their interest in children.

Over the years I've also heard reliable stories of people described as a "family man" taking advantage of providing lifts, offering to babysit, as a way of worming themselves into a position of trust from which they can groom their potential victims. These people are very clever. They know how to stay under the radar of the various surveillance systems. Those that are subsequently prosecuted represent only a small proportion of abusive acts and abused victims.

Having spoken to several people who have been abused, I know that the abuse lasts for ever. Stopping that happening is a small price to pay for the intrusive apparatus of an effective betting and barring scheme.

This morning's Independent on Sunday carries a worrying report that some women are going into social media channels such as facebook to share information and mutually encourage abusive relationship with children. I can't understand why the police just can't move in on facebook and jail the lot of them. Surely encouraging child abuse is a crime?

Let us hope and pray that the new scheme keeps the interests of children at its heart.