Background checks

Today I received an email from the head of my nursing department (yes, I'm one of those still lingering in the school system for a career) saying "based upon clinical affiliate contracts, we are now required to perform background checks on students who will be participating in clinical experiences". It will be performed by a "third party" and "the contract was just approved by our Attorney General". Not to mention we must pay for it (go figure, tuition isn't enough apparently).

This amounted into quite a debate among me and my friends. Initially, I was a bit indignant about the whole process and got into the whole respect of privacy rant. Then, someone put it into perspective...lets say you have a convicted child molester that applies for a school bus driver position. Wouldn't you want a background check performed on them before being hired? Which makes absolute sense.

Personally, I have nothing to be concerned about a background check...but just had me thinking about the lack of privacy and whatnot. People have been denied jobs due to background checks that reveal they have poor credit...which doesn't seem fair.

Just curious as to anyone's take on the matter of background checks.

Every job requires some sort of background check. Working minimum wage jobs usually require you to fill out previous work experience which is a background check and usually the higher up the pay scale you go the more intense they get.

Jobs dealing with children usually are quite involved and same with high security work or things of that nature. I don't see anything wrong with it. Heck when I have to hire babysitters I ask for references which is a background check.

reply to post by Bibliomaniac


I dont mind it at all. I am a paramedic and I had to get a background check. Pretty much anything in medicine is going to requier it. You are going to be working intimately with people of all ages. The hospital does not want anyone who will be touching patients to be a sex offender. In regards to credit checks, I think they have a place in medicine as well. Someone who is over there head in debt can resort to selling drugs from the hospital to get out of debt. Odds are they will get caught, but it is still possible to do it. That just my take on the whole thing. On a side note, good luck in your future career and enjoy your clinicals. That is where the majority of learning is anyway.

I used to work for a private investigation firm....one of my main jobs was to do background checks on people...in fact, I was the only person who did the background checks....did them for employers mostly....next law firms....then private individuals (such as parents want a bg check on a potential nanny, etc)

With a SSN I could find anything and then some on anyone along with people who stole SSNs....

It is pretty common for employment and you have nothing to worry about.....I had to get a BG check (along with credit) before they hired me


Wanted to add....

I only did credit background checks for companies....and they have to get the person's permission. The reason for this is because credit can (but not always) tell a lot about a person. Also, if a person will be dealing with money or other financial matters, it is good to have that credit report because it can show whether the person or not can be trusted with money. Although there are of course exceptions to every rule.....

reply to post by lcbjr1979


Thanks for the input. I'm actually already an EMT, so I know the whole protocol and whatnot. Also kind of ironic that they have just put this into the rulebook when my class will be graduating shortly. Again, I have no qualms about the full background check. But in regards to credit...is it moral to deny a job in regards to credit? In this economy, many have fallen behind on their credit. Making the assumption that one will steal medication to make a quick dollar seems like a bit of a reach to me.

reply to post by Bibliomaniac


It's not a perfect system for sure such as in regards to people with a Felony record. They may no longer be a threat but it will still show up I believe. But it's really the best way for an employer to see the person for who they are beyond the interview even though it may not be a true perspective.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Must have been quite an interesting job...

I'm not arguing against background checks, I see the need for them...but it is a little unnerving that our SSN can be used to reveal so much about ourselves.

Regardless, thanks for sharing (thought credit check was just routine on any background check).

While people can and do change, not everyone does.

Bottom line is the business has to protect themselves and background checks can tell a lot about a person.

Cant tell you how many checks I did on people who had active warrants out against them or had a very very very lengthy rap sheet....even from other states. Also, as I said earlier, the amount of stolen identification (stolen SSN) was ridiculous.

For example, I was doing a BG for someone who had worked at a fast food joint....the reason being, they were suspected of stealing from the registers...and before they filed charges they wanted us to do some "snooping"....the dude was NOT who he said he was on his app and was wanted in another state and had stolen the ID of someone who was dead. Police were then called.

Again, a business needs to protect themself and they have the right to hire the best people who will represent their company. If a person does not want a BG done on them, they dont have to follow thru with the application process.

Background checks are cool with me. You do the crime and do the time and have to live with the consequences and the record of it .

reply to post by Bibliomaniac


Is it moral? Probably not, but businesses are hiring people to represent their company, and with the bad economy people are more likely to steal stuff they think they can sell. I was reading a story the other day about people stealin a/c units right out of people's houses. In regards to selling drugs, In Bemidji, MN a medic was charged with selling morphine. He would say he was giving his patients 10 of ms and would give them less. He wrote his report as he gave 10, the full amount of the syringe so there was no need to have someone vouch for the wasted morphine. I am sure stuff like this is rare but it is still out there unfortunately.

reply to post by greeneyedleo



Yes, I suppose there is freedom in having to get permission for it to be performed. And I can only fathom the amount of criminals you have came upon. I suppose the consensus is that it is necessary and fair. Can't argue that.

reply to post by lcbjr1979


It is out there...but it is A LOT harder to fool the system in regards to meds. The narcotic count is pretty secure these days. Must have a witness and count done prior to removing the meds. Can you get away with it, sure...but it's tough to do so.

reply to post by Bibliomaniac


Yes you are right, in the hospital setting it is much stricter and secure. I am up in northern MN and our hospital just got one of those fancy medication machines that make the staff put in their id number before it dispenses the medication. Not 100% sure how it works but i am sure it logs the amount dispensed and the member who recieved it. Machines like that will make it much harder to steal any meds.

reply to post by lcbjr1979


Exactly. It still wouldn't be that hard to pocket em when you have a patient that doesn't even want em. But they are trying anyways

In the uk you need to get a disclosure forum, which is essentially a background check if you work in any way with children/community clubs/ most hospital work etc.

i really dont see it as a bad thing, it certainley allows you to make sure what convicted criminals you have on board

(we must pay for these too)

in the current police state we all now live in, i dont know anyone without some sort of criminal history. I dont know the world the rest of you live in, but in mine almost everyone i know has had some interaction with the local police.

i understand how a company wants to protect itself. but by doing background checks they are hurting good people who might have done something stupid one day and now has to pay for it for the rest of their lives.

Yes there are people who dont change, but imho the folks that do change far outnumber the ones that do.

This policy and others like it, only force the criminal elements in life to get more extreme. when you try and try and try to find a job and are getting turned down because of something on your record from 15 yrs ago is criminal imo and very un-american

I dont see the problem with background checks. I have had them done for previous jobs.
People who dont want them done usually have something to hide. I can understand the point of view from people who think it is just another way of checking up on you or invading privacy or whatever, but lets be honest, wether you have one done or not, the details they could recover are availible anyway.
Like it or not, everybody has a history and most of the details are availible, so if you have nothing to hide, its not a problem

Background checks are false security.

Just about anyone can snap loose at some point in their lives. Just because you hadnt yet doesnt mean you wont which means the check is worthless.

Likewise there is no guarantee that a wild youth will continue to behave wildly making that background check a useless obstacle to future prospects. One that could potentially encourage carrying on the wild behavior for lack of opportunity.

In short, they're a waste of time.

I should add, I am subjected to background checks all the time. I'm an avid firearm collector and work in government and hold carry permits all over the country. I must go through at least a dozen background checks a year complete with fingerprints and head shots. It's all really a waste of time. A dozen checks a year isnt a promise I wont go nuts at some point.

reply to post by MachiventaMelchizedek


Pretty much why I'm still torn on the issue. I think everyone must be held accountable for their actions -- but mistakes are made by good people, and that record can haunt someone for years. Suppose it depends on the crime and occupation the person is seeking.

i have nothing to hide by the way, i have a history with the local pd. Nothing serious when i was 19 i had a knife on me got pulled over they found the knife in my pocket i wasnt trying to hide it. The knife just didnt come with one of those belt clips so i threw it in my pocket. They charged me with carrying a concealed weapon charge. i knew it wasnt serious the cops knew it wasnt serious but when i go to apply for a job, said background check pops up and says i have had a concealed weapon charge. dosnt say what/ or what the circumstances was, it just says concealed weapon which most people think gun.

it was not. Now im having the hardest time finding work. if im not working im being a strain on the system, i.e. not paying taxes, im not on welfare or anything nor do i get foodstamps. But i could be out there contributing in some way, but nope. This goes for many many americans.

Background checks are false security.