Bitter Sweet Sixteen: UK Vetting Laws

Like the reporter in this video, I am currently sixteen and I think the thoughts she raised in this video were particularly interesting and insightful. There is lack of trust of strangers in the world and it was interesting to see the parents in the report speaking about the CRB checks and how it has affected them. I do not think the CRB checks should be for young people. I think it is taking away our freedoms and rights as young people. It shows that the government and police force do not have faith or trust us youths - I can understand why they do not yet I still do not think CRB checks for younger people is right. Great report.

To comment and judge about vetting and other similar laws certainly needs to be looked at it in many different and wider perspectives in order to obtain a very clear picture or the effects it has on society.
Let’s start with one out of sight warning that we are getting from this law; obviously it seems this law is another tactic from the government to protect vulnerable children or vulnerable people from exposure to dangerous and criminal minds. However, it is not indicating how much this will increase the culture of distrust and will isolate people and families from each other. Therefore it was interesting to see discussion about it in this film.
The other aspect which has never been mentioned is about those we call people with criminal records and what about those who have committed one or more mistake/crime in their lives? Do they have to be rejected everywhere because of their past? What option we are providing them with an alternative to reoffending? Certainly by rejecting them from many areas in society will never help them to move away from criminal life and will leave them no other choice or very few options. And is it enough to judge people with their records in government’s files?
It appears to me that this law and many other laws that lately that been formed (like personal identity cards and ...) is another way of lifting power from society and giving it to authority and putting another board around the families and individuals causing even more isolation.
Can we really judge people, their characters and their talent/abilities based on their past and records? It was good point to mention on Bitter Sweet Sixteen about trusting our own judgment rather than relying on records.
The film mostly illustrate many good points, However, it ignores or mentions less effectively other important aspects, like is vetting going to help protect society or it is going to create more bureaucracy and stress among us? What is the long term effect of it and who is going to benefit and who will be damaged?
Overall, Bitter Sweet Sixteen discusses very interesting issue in very polite way! However I believe it could have been illustrated the subject more effectively if it had been made less politely.
Ramin/Marco

This seems just one example of a myriad of ways in which the State and media attempt to attain public consensus around the need to accept increased levels of monitoring whilst eschewing personal liberty. One could replace the term 'paedophile' with that of 'terrorist' or 'illegal immigrant' when analysing the discourse justifying the need for identity cards, and comparing it to the vetting debate. Constructed moral panics are an inveterate means to achieve public agreement to State intervention, in order to quell a perceived danger. Noting the irony, one might view this as akin to 'grooming' the public to accept and submit to increased levels of State control. The interviewer in this film herself reveals how pervasive these ideas have become by suggesting that amongst her peer group, the acceptance of the need to be vetted has become normalised.

So, I’m guilty of paedophilia if not proven otherwise? That’s exactly what the CRB check scheme suggests. It’s demeaning, insulting and it contradicts the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ rule of our judicial system. The state is paranoid about protecting its inhabitants and expresses this by creating transparent citizens, taking away privacy without even having clues about violations. People who want to protect themselves from prying eyes are made out to be a paedophile. People who want to work in certain areas are forced to comply. Instead of concentrating on the small minority of offenders, the masses are being monitored. We are being watched. Not that that’s something new in London – the average citizen is captured on CCTV 300 times a day. But the CRB checks go further – it demands documents and money (if you’re not a volunteer) – supposed proof. Supposed protection.

The question is, by going overboard like this, isn’t the state damaging the people more than helping them? Paedophiles find ways of abusing children, with or without CRB checks. But what the vetting does is poison those it claims to protect – it’s imposing misanthropic ideas on children, turning every stranger into somebody who’s more likely to be an enemy than a friend. The possibility always exists but it is rather small. Feeding children with those attitudes locks them up in a golden cage, induces fear to go outside because every passersby can violate you (the story of the 7 year old too afraid to pass the gate of her parent’s house due this is very telling and worrisome.) Where will this lead?

Clear and succinct discussion on an issue that is posing many critical questions but offering no clear solutions. The UK’s vetting laws illustrate a constant need for by state to pry into the affairs of private individuals. This is something that is not only changing the nature of how we relate to one another, but is leading to both a sense of mistrust and unnecessary misapprehension amongst young people who are not even adults for another two years.

This bitter sweet sixteen period of transition of which the UK’s vetting laws are now focussing on, is also shedding a critical eye on how we regard the state from the point of view of both the adult and that of the juvenile. This is something that the short film tries to illustrate and, to a lighter extent, tries to answer: Is it correct for CRB checks to be made on individuals that are still to a certain extent juveniles? Is it fair to pose a question or inference of criminality and questionable character every time you wish to deal with an individual / child or institution that more or less is familiar with you, and by all intents and purposes can vouch for your good character?

The issue of vetting laws and children being at risk should, as the film suggests, ask the question as to where this legislation and attitude is leading us. It is right that we should protect and be vigilant of the threats to the most vulnerable within our society and no one in their right mind would think otherwise. But should this be at the expense of freedoms and rights that we as a community have taken for granted? As a culture we have always aspired to find well thought out, non – rudimentary and sophisticated solutions to difficult questions such as these, which create both a moral hazard as well as having a real life and time effect on our lives.

A film such as this helps us to ask these questions but is not quite a rational vehicle to provide proper and fair answers and solutions. None the less it is a good effort when you compare it to the one-size-fits-all discourse that this UK government is following.

Agree that needing a CRB check to look after a family friend is unreasonable. Also daunting that for not having a CRB check your automatically regarded as a criminal. Soon of which will cause people to stop using their own judgment.