[Ansteorra] Bad things
ladyemp at sbcglobal.net
Mon May 14 10:51:16 PDT 2007
As a parent myself, I cannot see a single thing wrong with any of the
suggestions that you have made here, and I would support them
wholeheartedly. Even if my child were a teen instead of a 6 year old, I
would still support these suggestions, it might embarrass the teen, but I'd
rather have a safe embarrassed teen than one who has been misused by anyone.
Besides, if it's the norm for all under 18, it shouldn't be embarrassing. :)
Elizabeta of Rundel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Dun Gillan" <ian1550 at sbcglobal.net>
To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Bad things
> Now that this thread has an opportunity to stop being personal conjecture
> and is now turning in a better direction I have something to say. Thank
> to Don Robin for the redirect, and thank you to Burke and Ivo for
> along with that.
> Children are truly precious and we need to do everything we can to protect
> them, they are not only the future of the SCA but the future of the world.
> We here in Ansteorra are often leaders in innovations with in the SCA. We
> should start now to put into place some changes that would help protect
> children and our organization. What ever is done should be accomplished is
> such a way to not hindering all that we do in the SCA. In my, non-parental
> non-lawyer, opinion there are a few ways to be as safe as possible and
> be able to include children and youth activities.
> The first option would be to require parents to be physically present at
> and all SCA activities involving their child. This also means that
> of any age under 18 would have to be in the physical presence of their
> parent at all times. If the parents are present and involved in the same
> activity as their minor child then if something wrong does happen it would
> most likely not be the SCA who is at fault. .
> The second option would be to change the waivers signed by each adult who
> brings a child with them waiving the SCA of any and all legal
> responsibilities to the safety and well being of this child and taking on
> themselves all such responsibilities.
> The third option is to become very strict on the policy all ready in place
> that does not allow children or teens to be dropped off for any activity
> any regard involving the SCA, if there is not a legal guarding present
> a signed and notarized waiver. If a minor is left unattended at an event,
> meeting, or practice with out a parent or legal guardian then that minor
> should be remanded to the local authorities until the parent can be
> to pick them up.
> The fourth option is to require background checks of all individuals who
> work with minors (MOCs, Youth Marshals, Chirurgeons, etc.) Then to limit
> those adults who take place is children's and youth activities to people
> have passed the required background check.
> Please remember that this is only my opinion and does not reflect in any
> the official opinion of the Crown, Kingdom or SCA. I know that these
> options seem rather harsh and that there would be some uncomfortable
> adjustments especially with teens, and parents who are used to allowing
> their child to run free...but what is needed for a child's safety is some
> absolutism in the creation and implementation of policies. What we are
> looking for here is the safety of the children and the continuation of the
> SCA brought forth in the best way possible.
> Ian Dun Gillan
> Baron of Northkeep
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
More information about the Ansteorra