How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ash Your Own Question
Ash, Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 10916
Experience:  Solicitor with 5+ years experience
Type Your Law Question Here...
Ash is online now

My father had an allegation of a historical act made against

This answer was rated:

My father had an allegation of a historical sexual act made against him 15 months ago via an ex scout( now approx 25). This was handled by the police and social services who both closed the case with no further action. The Scout Association however have asked him to take a polygraph which I refused and are excluding him from the movement saying he is "unsuitable". There is no evidence that suggests anything happened and the scouts have not once asked my father for his side of the story. Where do we stand?

Hello my name is ***** ***** I will help you.

What is it you want to achieve please?

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
I want to know if we have a legal case or similar if he is excluded from the movement with no evidence or without hearing his side of the story which contradicts some of the allegation.

is he employed or does he volunteer?

Customer: replied 1 year ago.

Do the Scouts have a policy on historic sexual abuse matters?
If so what does it say where there is no further action?

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
No policy on historical sexual abuse although there is a child protection policy

What does that say in terms of if allegations are made or tarnishing the Scouting name?

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Margaret Giles and Tim Kidd
May 2015
Changes were made to the suspension process on 29 May 2015. This document describes the changes and the reasons for making the changes.
The suspension process has had a number of updates over the previous two years but only in areas of guidance which has left POR unchanged. Over the past few years we have gathered feedback from Commissioners who operate the process, people suspended as part of the process and Appointment Advisory Committees involved in the process. We have also taken into account recommendations from a number of safeguarding enquiries that have identified a clear and strong thread of changes that are required. We have also considered feedback that we receive to***@******.*** when people have looked at the advice and guidance given on
Outline of Changes
In outline the changes are:
a) Allow HQ to exclude adults who have been suspended and who we believe are wholly unsuitable to be in Scouting.
b) Tidy-up the language in the suspension rules to ensure that they are clear about what is required and what is optional.
c) Greater clarity about what an excluded person is not permitted to do regarding Scout premises and Scout activity.
d) Make provision for suspended people who are also parents or carers of youth members.
e) Provide for reconciling differences between the AAC and Commissioners when ending a period of suspension.
f) Update the table of authorisation for suspension to take into account the UK wide perspective.
g) Retitle the support role for a suspended person to make it a liaison role as otherwise it can be assumed that the person undertaking the role agrees with the actions of an individual who might be accused (and possibly found guilty) of highly inappropriate offences.
(a) HQ Exclusions in the Suspension Process
Our rules allow us to exclude from Scouting adults who are unsuitable (e.g. found guilty of an offence against children). This exclusion takes place mostly when an individual undertakes a check against formal records (DBS in England and Wales, Disclosure Scotland in Scotland, Access NI in Northern Ireland). In these cases, exclusion is enacted from headquarters. Note that this exclusion process applies to any adult whether or not that person is a formal Member of Scouting.
There are some circumstances in safeguarding incidents where adults are suspended and, whilst they do not trigger the level for exclusion from Scouting by headquarters, they might be considered by the Safeguarding Team to be wholly unsuitable for Scouting. Currently the only route open to us is for the Appointments Advisory Committee to cancel the appointment. Note that this is cancellation and not exclusion and therefore these individuals might continue to be involved in Scouting in other locations.
The Safeguarding Team has received feedback from Appointments Advisory Committees that they feel very uncomfortable in these circumstances because:
a) they know the individual or know of them, and cancelling membership would be too difficult to manage locally;
b) they don’t have a detailed understanding of the subject matter and therefore don’t see the risks that the Safeguarding Team does;
c) they feel that if the Safeguarding Team has such a strong view then HQ should cancel the individual’s appointment and exclude them (which the current rules do not permit).
For the occasions (and these are few) when it is clear that the individual is unsuitable to work with young people and that the individual should be excluded, the rules now allow headquarters to do so.
New Rule 15.3f
Headquarters may directly end a period of suspension by excluding a suspended person from Scouting if the individual is unsuitable to participate in Scouting.
Clearly there will need to be operational consistency with this approach and so a clear set of decision points will be used. The decision to exclude an individual will be open to appeal following the same decision structure as we use when excluding individuals through the vetting process (to ensure consistency).
To ensure that this process operates well, it is subject to:
a) agreement on a case by case basis by a Chief Commissioner (as is currently the case for exclusions enacted through the vetting route); and
b) operational overview through the Safeguarding Team line management including the Head of Safeguarding; and
c) regular oversight and review through the Safeguarding Development Group (which is the group responsible for an oversight of safeguarding policy and operation and incudes volunteers and staff members).
(b) Suspension Rule Clarity
From safeguarding enquiries there is evidence that people were either confused (or able to use the apparent confusion) that some aspects of the suspension rules are not clear between items that are required and those that are optional. Having reviewed the rules, there are only minor issues in this regard and we made the followi

Ok, can he be excluded yes. The document certainly gives the power to do that.

It may be that even though there has been an unfounded allegation that parents are weary of sending children to that Scout group.

This means that they are able to exclude him. But I would hope they Would take a pragmatic approach and consider as there has been no evidence, no charge and no conviction that he is wholly innocent.

But to answer your question - can they exclude, yes. Are they likely to - no.

Can I clairfy anything for you about this today please?


Ash and other Law Specialists are ready to help you