RESPONSES
Feedback from Decision makers regarding Fingerprinting & background checks of teachers and other
school personnel
So far there has been only one substantive response from my elected representatives
to the letter
I sent them regarding
background checks of school personnel.
The letter was sent to Senator Paul Davis, Sr., Representative Ruel Cross, to
Governor Angus King, and Education Commissioner J. Duke Albanese, with copies to
MSAD 64 Superintendent Leonard Ney, and the Bangor Daily News. It appeared in
the Bangor Daily News on Tuesday, Nov. 2.
It is no surprise that the first -- and so far only -- one of my elected representatives
to respond meaningfully was
Senator Paul Davis (R - Sangerville). He has been the most
responsive of them in the past, especially with regard to school-related issues.
I was especially pleased to hear from Senator Davis on this matter as he has
a background in both school administration and in law enforcement, making his
views particulary significant with regard to fingerprinting and background checks
of school personnel.
Davis feels that it was poorly thought out, poorly designed, a possible
invasion of civil liberties, and an unfundated mandate that can work hardship on
the affected persons. He described it as "Another example of governmental
hysteria." He is quoted in an article in the Moosehead Messenger (October 14) as saying
"Obviously, the intent of the bill was to insure that our children are protected
from sexual predators and other miscreants in our schools. While the intent of the
legislation was commendable, I believe the state should have stepped up and
agreed to pay for the cost of this mandate when the bill was first enacted."
However, Davis sees the problem as going deeper than just the attempt of
the State to force an unfunded mandate upon school personnel. He sees it as
a confiscation of basic liberties with no good end to be served by their loss.
He feels that there are no good answers to my fears that this legislation will
accomplish little or nothing for the protection of our children and will
serve only to reduce the quality of their education.
Davis does, however, see value in requiring background checks of some sort
on people entering the system for the first time. It is
conceivable that some history of child abuse/molestation could fall through the cracks in a
normal investigation. Some others with whom I have discussed the matter have
offered -- with varying degrees of enthusiasm -- the same opinion.
Others, such as MSAD 64 Superintendent Leonard Ney, point out that prudent officials already conduct such an extensive background check on incoming employees that only in exceedingly rare instances would fingerprinting of new hires be of any value. Thus, even this fingerprinting would be an invasion of privacy without reasonable cause.