Paying $5 for each person is as close to free as it gets if a reasonable background check is being performed. The SOR would be just one of several "filters" used to screen candidates.Originally Posted by Mayhemxpc
Paying $5 for each person is as close to free as it gets if a reasonable background check is being performed. The SOR would be just one of several "filters" used to screen candidates.
Last edited by martymayes; 02-22-2016 at 10:54 PM.
Sure it is worth it, just go and fly, the experience of the kids is all the reason to do it.
The way the policy is written though it would appear we have to go out of our way to explain there may be incidental touching, which in itself may throw up some huge red flags. I good friend of mine who has flown with me numerous times wanted her daughter to fly in the YE program. So at a rally I invited her and she brought along a friend with her daughter. I had discussed all of this with my friend who thought it was ridiculous. She explained the policy to the other woman who not only thought it was ridiculous but could be harming in itself. Instead of being happy for her daughter's first flight, was she now to worry about someone touching her daughter? Both women are involved in a local softball league with their kids. And no they don't have to submit to background checks.
$5 x how many pilots is a chunk of cash. Even if the SOR could only process one name per minute, that equates to paying someone $300/hour for keystroking names. But why do they need more than just your name? Why can't the chapters handle that? If all they were doing was checking the SOR I don't think anyone would mind. It seems like reasonable due diligence.
Now that you mention filters (which I had not thought of before), what other "filters" are needed and who is making the decision about who gets filtered out? Aside from the very real risk of release of PII, where is the due process in screening someone out? I saw the question related to that on the FAQ and I also noted that answer sidestepped the question. In essence it appears you will not be able to see the evidence against you.
I admit that it is a hard struggle to try to convince EAA management to adopt a true risk management approach. The summary of a report on the Princton-Brookings website "The Future of Children" includes a report by Dr. David Finkelohr titled "The Prevention of Childhood Sexual Abuse." The report states, "In theory these searches bar dangerous people from youth serving environments and discourages others with records from applying." The summary concludes, however, that "little evidence exists that they (background screenings) are effective in preventing sexual abuse" Nonetheless, the section of the report dealing with these background checks concludes: "Conducting background checks has become such standard practice that it is not clear that evidence about their efficacy would have much effect on policy."
I have no problem with taking the training -- but I will hold off for now, since the program seems to be in regular revision. But after reading the arguments in favor of background screening in government publications and the few scholarly works I can find on it, I am beginning to be concerned that if I take the training but refuse to submit to the screening, that might be taken as an indicator that I am a potential abuser.
I may not prevail in an effort to bring logic to bear on this issue, but I will continue to try my very best in the struggle for rational policy decisions.
Last edited by Mayhemxpc; 02-24-2016 at 08:10 PM. Reason: proofreading
I have the biggest problem with handing the prospective Young Eagle's parent a form alerting them to be sure and help us look out for child molesters. This can plant the seed to a problem that some parents might want to take advantage of since every pilot of a "Private Plane" is rich. My other problem is with the record keeping. Our chapter has a problem keeping track of the previous meeting let alone what happened 2-3 years ago. I see this as a way of the insurance denying coverage because of something we did wrong. I'm the president of our chapter and I will not put my wallet on the line to offer free rides to kids and open myself and others up to this type of exposure.
Thanks to Mr. Pelton for clarifying the changes to EAA policy concerning Young Eagles flights.
I'll be flying kids as I get a chance - as I have always; it will just be under my own auspices, not that of the EAA.
Over and out.
as will I
It can also plant the seed that there is already a problem. After all, most of what the public sees is companies and organizations being reactive to an incident, not being proactive. Just like being handed a injury waiver. If it was truly safe and very little accident history, why do you need a waiver signed? Accidents must be fairly common, right?
The reality is molestation exists. Background checks will do nothing to stop them. Read this if you really want to find out more.
http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV192.pdf
The Prevention of Childhood Sexual Abuse
David Finkelhor
Summary
David Finkelhor examines initiatives to prevent child sexual abuse, which have focused on two primary strategies—offender management and school-based educational programs. Recent major offender management initiatives have included registering sex offenders, notifying communities about their presence, conducting background employment checks, controlling where offenders can live, and imposing longer prison sentences. Although these initiatives win approval from both the public and policy makers, little evidence exists that they are effective in preventing sexual abuse. Moreover, these initiatives, cautions Finkelhor, are based on an overly stereotyped characterization of sexual abusers as pedophiles, guileful strangers who prey on children in public and other easy-access environments and who are at high risk to re-offend once caught. In reality the population is much more diverse. Most sexual abusers are not strangers or pedophiles; many (about a third) are themselves juveniles. Many have relatively low risks for re-offending once caught. Perhaps the most serious shortcoming to offender management as a prevention strategy, Finkelhor argues, is that only a small percentage of new offenders have a prior sex offense record that would have involved them in the management system. He recommends using law enforcement resources to catch more undetected offenders and concentrating intensive management efforts on those at highest risk to re-offend. Finkelhor explains that school-based educational programs teach children such skills as how to identify dangerous situations, refuse an abuser’s approach, break off an interaction, and summon help. The programs also aim to promote disclosure, reduce self-blame, and mobilize bystanders. Considerable evaluation research exists about these programs, suggesting that they achieve certain of their goals. Research shows, for example, that young people can and do acquire the concepts. The programs may promote disclosure and help children not to blame themselves. But studies are inconclusive about whether education programs reduce victimization. Finkelhor urges further research and development of this approach, in particular efforts to integrate it into comprehensive health and safety promotion curricula.
Recently, we had a (previously)well regarded Navy Captain in our community identified as a sexual predator. He had a Top Secret clearance that requires 5 year reinvestigations, performed by the Defense Security Service and other Federal LE entities.
i remain unconvinced to the efficacy of EAA's cursory background investigations and believe they pose real risk of identity theft.
The EAA's requirement for a background check is security theater. All it is doing is driving those of us away who consider the risk of identity theft real.
The education and training aspects of YPP are good. Having policies that support vigilance and awareness are good.
i will remain with EAA and continue to be a voice for a balanced risk based approach, but I will not expose my personal data to a firm that may not be capable of safeguarding it or the results of any investigation.
Many of of us have not led perfect lives, and while I have done nothing that would cause me to be expelled from YE duties, there is information from past missteps that a thorough investigation would uncover, aggregate and cause embarrassment if publicly disclosed.
I doubt I am alone.
ted
I would not expect EAA to rock the boat. They are just going to turn and paddle with the current....choose your battles wisely type thing. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Posting Permissions
