House Judiciary advises against criminal background checks for
positions involving contact only in group settings
A Criminal Justice
Information Services document, "The Volunteers for Children Act - Amending
the National Child Protection Act," provided to MEAF by the FBI
raised the question of the value of fingerprinting
and national criminal history record checks when compared to other means:
"...the [House] Committee [on the Judiciary] does not believe that all
occupations and volunteer positions within that broad definition [of 'child
care provider'] merit the time and expense of criminal history records
checks. There are other means available to protect children from abuse,
including the checking of prior employment history and character references
and proper training and supervision of employees and volunteers. The
Committee expects that the States, in deciding which types of categories of
positions require criminal history background checks, will consider the
degree to which a particular position or child care activity offers
opportunites to those who abuse children. The Committee expects that the
States will find, for example, that positions involving long-term or
on-going contact with children in one-on-one situations merit criminal
history record checks and that positions that involve infrequent direct
contact or contact only in group settings do not merit such checks."
What would the writers of this advice -- the House Judiciary Committee -- think
of Maine's fingerprinting law?