For something that specialised I wouldn’t accept anything less.
I cover a general “usual and possible camp activities” during the intake process (although it’s not currently given in physical format to take away).
Things like wing or lower organised camps and activities are far easier to predict than the standard, annual blues camps and most I’ve seen have some kind of “planned activities” notice - usually as part of the advertising.
And this is the problem with having a generic form. No one can prove what the parent is told before they sign the form, or that they are aware of what they are signing for!
Yes you can - Generic TG form with Medical declaration and then the Joining Letter / power point slides for the brief is attached to the SMS application so its all nice and auditable and chain of command are aware of what you have briefed the parents. If someone is going to rogue about the activities they are doing then they will find a way round the system regardless (you can only catch them after they have gone rogue).
My point is that a generic form still does not cover consent for specific activities. There is nowhere on the form to say whether or not specific information has been supplied to, or understood by, the signatory.
As you say the current system you describe satisfies our CoC, but would have problems surviving scrutiny in the worst case scenario of an inquest, therefore placing the head of the activity in a position they most probably are not aware of!
I’m not saying that we should not have the TG21. It needs to be less generic and be far more relevant to whichever activity that parental consent is required for!
So there you are opportunity comes up, not specifically covered (few things are), do you start trying to get hold of parents etc, but then there are say two cadets where you can’t get hold of a parent, do you say you can’t do it to the cadet?
The other side is a list of all possible things (impossible) signed for specifically and again there is a split, which causes staffing / transport problems.
The generic consent is best and then our judgement.
No, no and thrice no!!
If you cannot obtain Parental Consent for specific event, the cadet cannot take part in it!! If you do allow it without consent, you are opening yourself to be sued to high heaven by the Cadets parents when something goes wrong.
You cannot have an overriding generic constant form and then allow staff to make decisions around specific “risky” activities instead of their parents. Again you are opening yourself to be sued etc, etc!!
I am not basing my comments on if, buts and maybes. I am basing it on court cases brought against British Expedition providers due to actions occurring under their supervision.
You can stick to a generic form and keep your fingers crossed that nothing goes wrong, or you could provide more information, showing attempts to gain informed consent, such as daws1159’s letter. When it comes down to it, it is your choice. I know which one I would take!
The consent for these activities is on the 3822A…
As part of the normal ATC programme, cadets may participate in strenuous physical activities such as fieldcraft, adventure training and leadership exercises.
These activities are designed to stretch individuals outside their comfort zone, under controlled conditions, led by appropriately qualified staff.
That’s not enough to provide informed consent. Most parents wouldn’t have a clue what adventure training could potentially entail,
Our annual camp programme was released to the cadets, and one of the AT activities highlighted, didn’t actually go ahead. At least 5 cadets, and one set of parents,approached me to say that that activity was the only reason they signed up to come…
But individual staff are not making decisions about such activities. HQAC sanction, and the MOD indemnify, a set list of approved activities. Cadets joining the Air Cadets can expect to take part in any of those activities. Consent to join the Air Cadets should surely then be consent to take part in any of those activities?
Anything not on the list has to have specific permissions from HQAC and the RAF/MOD - in that care I’d expect specific parental permission to be sought.
Why can the 3822A not direct the parents to the RAFAC website, why a complete list of authorised activities are listed? And specific consent made a requirement of any activity not on that list?
You’re making an assumption that every parent has access to the internet and are capable ofaccessing it.
It is not an unreasonable assumption.
Friends, internet cafés, public libraries…
Perhaps the parents with court orders prohibiting them to access the Internet might struggle, but I would expect then not to be the legal guardian of a cadet either.
Everyone has free access to the Internet via the public library system - it may not be convenient though! If you wanted to go old school, you could include a free post address at HQAC, for printed media. Or just offer the parents the use of a sqn pc, if you have them?
If they are really interested in what their kids will be doing, then they won’t mind making a little bit of an effort to find out?
You live in parts of the UK the internet is so poor as to be not available, public libaries in particular like internet cafe’s don’t exist.
Then you aren’t trying hard enough. It doesn’t need to be immediately available.
Tough.
That’s the attitude, if you can’t access it then ‘tough’. Try that one stood up in court
Given that we would have made reasonable efforts to ensure the information was freely available to everybody and that only an extremely small minority would have had trouble accessing it, and then only through their severe obstinacy, I suggest that it would stand up just fine.
I am sure we could charge them for a printed copy to be collected from the squadron should they choose that they cannot get access online.
You do realise there are 10,000,000 people in the UK who have no access or cannot use a computer in the UK. Digital discrimination is a reality.
Cite a source for that random statistic and elaborate on how many fall within the target demographic.
Can we not cover the additional costs incurred?
If Cranwell reprographics stops sending me first class log books, the postage we’d save would be enough to fund Internet access for the 10,000,000 of us who can’t get online… 