My DDs school district -- which as you know, is in a relatively affluent area -- doesnt do this. All employees are fingerprinted at school expense. I believe theory is that volunteers should not be alone with students. I think it is outrageous -- everything -- the fee, the livescan, and the idea that even if fingerprinted volunteers should be left alone with students.

My DDs district depends on volunteers. From library assistants, to mornning drop off, to math labs. At the end of the day, the teachers have to supervise. IMHO.

WOW! I am all for background checks but 61.00 is a lot of money! Our school doesnt do this, schools have funds to allocate for certain things, you would think that if the school is going to use a system that costs so much, that they would have a fund set up to offset the cost. what about the parents that cant afford it? they cant particiapte at their childs school because of income?it kinda takes the public outa public school.....they should at least have some sort of financial aid assistance for low income parents who want to volunteer..
as far as baked goods go, we cant bring anything homeade to school here where I am...rediculous!!!

I have mixed emotions about this one. Preditors hang at places where there are children so fingerprinting is ok with me. As it is they don't do enough back ground checks on school bus drivers, teachers, janitors, etc. here, so checking on volunteers doesn't make sense to me.

I wish my bank would use finger prints with every withdrawal and any check presented to them.

Our school district is implimenting a background check on all volunteers, but not via fingerprints. We are in discussions right now as to whether the school district, school itself or the PTO should pay for this. The cost is no where close to $61 a person, but it will have to happen every year.

We already background check all youth coaches in our sports leagues, and for those of us checked through that it will likely carry for the school. I'm already checked for work any way, so between that, coaching and PTO I'll be triple safe!!

I in no way think parents should have to pay for this to volunteer, but I am 110% for it. As the PTO President I had a woman who signed up to be on each committee we had. When I called her to verify she really wanted to do it all she said she certainly did . . . because her parole officer said she could count it as her community service if we said okay!

After I got up off the floor I referred her to the school principal.

Our school district requires backround check on everyone... and I do mean everyone. As a parent volunteer you have to submit new paperwork each year so that they can run a backround check on you. However, there is no cost to the parent ... just filling out the paperwork. As an employee of a non profit that works for the school district with a special program, every employee that would have direct or in direct contact with the schools or students had to have a backround check run at the expense of the company.

I personally love the policy. It makes me feel good to know that a child predator cant be working with my child at the school.

Volunteers should NEVER be left alone with kids. I do agree with doing backgrounds as well, but the truth is... someone could pass a background & still be a predator. All a background is going to do, is tell you if they have ever been arrested or convicted. Fingerprinting & background checks are a good thing, but they should not give anyone a false sense of security.

JNM, what was she on parole for? I would think some convictions might not impact someone's ability to help at school. someone that just hasn't been caught, scares me more than someone that has paid their debt to society and tells you that they are doing community service as a condition of their parole. At least the parolee is being honest. (and like I said, it would depend on what the conviction was and what position they wanted to volunteer for)

I just think it's outrageous to charge such a high fee. I paid $195 to bus my SD to & from school, but when she signed up for cross country, they charged us an additional $50 to bus her to the meets. (we had to pick her up from the meets) and later, I thought about it... We already paid for her to ride the bus everyday. Why do we have to pay extra because she's going to ride a different bus one day a week. On top of that, she didn't ride the bus two of the other days because she had practice & I had to go pick her up. I just felt ripped off a little by that.

It's bad enough when they hand you a list of things to buy & this year, the teacher gave out a 'wish list' of things for the classroom... expensive printer ink, etc. It just feels like every time I turn around, they are charging for things that were free when my kids were in school. (and I live in a fairly expensive area... the price range for a house is from $250k for a fixer upper to multi-million dollar houses), so they collect lots of property taxes. Makes me wonder what they are doing with all that money.

"It just feels like every time I turn around, they are charging for things that were free when my kids were in school. (and I live in a fairly expensive area... the price range for a house is from $250k for a fixer upper to multi-million dollar houses), so they collect lots of property taxes. Makes me wonder what they are doing with all that money."

Redistribution of wealth. (Sorry, couldn't pass that up...LOL)

Is "Livescan" more effective than plan old fingerprinting and a background check? What justifies the astronomical cost? Does the school get more information for the parents' $$?

Yes, we have more school expenses than we know what to do with too. The girl is a senior this year so we may have college expenses next year, don't know really. She hasn't really made up her mind yet if she's going to take some classes at community college. She'll graduate high school with her cosmetology license, though. She just needs to make up her mind...

I also think that her boyfriend (who is a bit older than she) may be considering proposing to her.

Lots of uncertainty this year. LOL

Its's not the same circumstance, but I had similar thoughts recently hearing about someone going to their mom's doctor's office with an FMLA (Family Medical Leave Act, which permits family members of an ailing person to take unpaid leave and retain their jobs, which requires a "medical certification" form that doctors sign) medical certification form and being charged a $15 "form fee" for the honor of them signing something that is this woman's legal right under federal law. My first thought (besides that FMLA is a federal law) was that it sounded very grabby and in poor taste for doctors to charge fees to fill out forms, even if technically speaking it does take a certain amount of time, effort and ink to do so. I was like "ew! what ever happened to 'bedside manner' and sensitivity to the patient and his/her family?" I felt as though there are certain costs that doctors' offices should just "suck up" as a matter of genuine dedication to providing full and caring service to their pateints ans their families. (It's not like they don't make enough money.) But even if each FMLA form takes a full $15 dollars of extra work (which it may or may not) I felt like I would much rather be charged the extra $15 in the form of "general patient maintainance" or a "quality care assurance" fund than be so expressly nickel-and-dimed about a FORM. In other words, I have no objection to the fact that doctors' offices may have particular costs to recoup, but something about this particular itemization struck me as kind of offensive. So in the case of schools and parents having to pay for this "Livescan" business when they volunteer, I feel the same way. I have no objection as a taxpayer (and I'm not even a parent) to the idea of contributing to an improved education system overall (which would seem to include *reasonable* predator-prevention measures) , even if this raises my taxes some, because presumably every child, as well as society overall, benefits. But I sure as heck would feel gross having to be nickel-and-dimed over my own background check, even if in actual practice some of my money was going toward that end anyway.

Hi Ima,
They've actually had the "no home-baked goods" rule here for a while. If you bring something in for the kids, it has to be purchased. If you bring it in for the teachers, you can make it at home. I think it's to protect the kids from the chance that someone would not take proper precautions when cooking, not have a sterile environment, etc. It does seem to take a lot of the fun out of it, but I do understand that having the potential for a parent getting another child sick and the school being held liable is a real risk.

IMO, it's society and our litigious nature now. Everyone is "sue-happy". I went to the local rent-all place a few weeks ago and nearly stepped off the concrete (they were doing work on the driveway) and one of the workers grabbed my elbow, softly, and said, be careful. I laughed, and said don't worry, I won't sue. He looked at me kind of strange and said, you'd be a fool not to. WHAAAA? My mouth kind of dropped open and stayed there!

The bus thing is ridiculous.

i absolutelly agree with no homebaked goods. many kids are allergic to ingredients. Some homes are not clean and who knows what moms pout in those goods. Of course you can get poisoned buying stuff in stores but at least there are some regulations. I don't know what regulations are in people's homes. maybe none.

As about paying extras. DD's high school cost me a lot even though it was public, kind of. there was no transportation, we had to pay for computers and library and books fee, pay for enrichment trips and classes on saturday and school breaks, buy our own expensive calculators etc. It also cost me a lot because i ended up moving to a specific area so she can attend specific school. But school has no extra money so for them to provide what they need to, parents need to contribute toward something. she got excellent education. If i wanted her to get "so so" education, i would make sure I don't pay a penny.

Ima, I only know the convictions because I can access that type of info easily so it wasn't something i discussed passed the principal, but there were a few - crimes against people, property and funds. . . . pretty much the three things she'd deal with as a volunteer.
One of the sports leagues DH and I coach for tried to block our neighbor from coaching because he duii. That was a mixed bag for me - she should a lack of good judgment, but it wasn't a crime directed at anyone. After he lawyered up he remained a coach.

I have several opinions on the school funding issues, but I do a post on that when I'm not so tired. :-)

JNM...

"dui...a lack of good judgment, but it wasn't a crime directed at anyone."

Oh boy. A DUI is not directed at a specific person, no. But it's almost worse than a crime that is focused on a specific person. A person drunk driving is a danger to everyone, without prejudice.

I think Canada has the right way of looking at DUI. You can't even get in the country if you have one.

A DUI shows a lack of consideration for everyone. It is a choice, as much as picking up a gun and robbing someone is. Except that it's socially acceptable to a point. A friend getting a DUI is likely to hear "oh, you poor thing" rather than "I can't believe you would do something that dangerous and stupid. You should be punished to the full extent of the law."

http://www.smartertravel.com/travel-advice/old-dui-stay-away-from-canada.html?id=2327630

Here is a link that might be useful: Old DUI? Stay away from Canada.