Heated debate surrounds a bill being considered in the Utah state legislature that would require referees for public school athletic programs to undergo criminal background checks.
Heated debate surrounds a bill being considered in the Utah State Legislature which would require referees for public school athletic programs to undergo criminal background checks. The bill would apply to 1,700 public schools sports officials
The checks would consist of fingerprinting administered by the Utah Bureau of Criminal Investigations. It has not been decided yet if referees may end up paying for their own checks or whether it will be passed on to the school districts.
Utah Representative Laura Black contends that the law is a preventative measure which will ensure protection of students. Arguing that it would be foolish to wait for something bad to happen before acting, Black stated, “I’d rather see us be proactive on this.”
Not so fast, countered Representative Brad Dee who regards the bill as unnecessary, citing no previous incidents reported involving athetic program referees.
“Is this a solution to try and find a problem?” he asked.
Black fired back stating sports officials are in a position where the trust of the student is placed in their hands. The potential for an incident in which an individual with a criminal background is hired to work with youth could be significant.
And what do the referees themselves have to say about this?
Mick Fieldsted, who has worked for years as a baseball and football referee, said, “As an official, you are never left unattended with students at all. It’s a pretty guarded situation.”
True as that may be, Mr. Fieldstead can’t account for the lone student changing in the locker room or the student athlete walking alone to their car after a big game. Granted, the rule may be that the officials are never left unattended with students, but there are always exceptions
Who’s not to say someone might not be lurking in a parked car or loitering behind the grandstand after the big game waiting for the right moment to act on a selfish or peverse desire?
Does anyone remember the Titanic? The supposedly sink-proof ship that skimped out on lifeboats? Well, the unthinkable did happen and the results were pretty tragic.
While comparing background checks in Utah one of the worst naval disasters in history may be a bit much, it was the first analogy that came to mind. I think you get my point.
Furthermore, this is by no means an attempt to go looking for a problem that doesn’t exist. It’s a more of a sensible identification of a potential problem and heading it off before one our our children is harmed needlessly.
Nothing’s ever happened in the past, so that must mean nothing will ever happen?
Super logic they’ve got going there.
Is there really a need for the debate to be heated? It should make perfect sense that anyone near a child should be screened. You don’t grab some guy of the street corner to watch your kids when you go out do you?
This one seems like a no-brainer to me… but some people are old fashioned and still have faith in mankind. They’ll figure it out eventually.
I can’t believe that an elected official says that since nothing has happened there is no need for background checks. It is amazing to me that these people would say that but in the event that something did happen who is to blame. I think that it should be standard for anyone involved in school / student actives be background checked to some extent.
That is crazy! I guess they are just waiting for a nasty lawsuit!
I get the feeling that the debate isn’t quite so strong among parents of students. Surely parents are concerned enough about their children to want to protect them from offenders.
I get the feeling that the debate isn’t quite so strong among parents of students. Surely parents are concerned enough about their children to want to protect them from offenders.
bMmuP4 juvjkbqyspxf, [url=http://guyemweimlyk.com/]guyemweimlyk[/url], [link=http://ksucgzmbjkmj.com/]ksucgzmbjkmj[/link], http://qspzfxmnptwz.com/
O5zh8K lvvewphemudk, [url=http://jrgzkdilsalh.com/]jrgzkdilsalh[/url], [link=http://nzitvzncrnqt.com/]nzitvzncrnqt[/link], http://shljbiovgneh.com/
O5zh8K lvvewphemudk, [url=http://jrgzkdilsalh.com/]jrgzkdilsalh[/url], [link=http://nzitvzncrnqt.com/]nzitvzncrnqt[/link], http://shljbiovgneh.com/
I can’t believe that an elected official says that since nothing has happened there is no need for background checks. It is amazing to me that these people would say that but in the event that something did happen who is to blame. I think that it should be standard for anyone involved in school / student actives be background checked to some extent.
I get the feeling that the debate isn’t quite so strong among parents of students. Surely parents are concerned enough about their children to want to protect them from offenders.
This one seems like a no-brainer to me… but some people are old fashioned and still have faith in mankind. They’ll figure it out eventually.
O5zh8K lvvewphemudk, [url=http://jrgzkdilsalh.com/]jrgzkdilsalh[/url], [link=http://nzitvzncrnqt.com/]nzitvzncrnqt[/link], http://shljbiovgneh.com/
That is crazy! I guess they are just waiting for a nasty lawsuit!
That is crazy! I guess they are just waiting for a nasty lawsuit!
That is crazy! I guess they are just waiting for a nasty lawsuit!
bMmuP4 juvjkbqyspxf, [url=http://guyemweimlyk.com/]guyemweimlyk[/url], [link=http://ksucgzmbjkmj.com/]ksucgzmbjkmj[/link], http://qspzfxmnptwz.com/