Most of my references were never contacted either, but once or twice it actually happened. Once I was actually contacted as a reference though, and it seemed like the only way they were going to get anything regarding poor moral character or psychological disorders from their questions was if I actively chose to spill the beans (answerin…
Most of my references were never contacted either, but once or twice it actually happened. Once I was actually contacted as a reference though, and it seemed like the only way they were going to get anything regarding poor moral character or psychological disorders from their questions was if I actively chose to spill the beans (answering honestly wouldn't have done it). Of course, no one puts down references that they know have an axe to grind.
From what I've heard, employers have a tendency to not say anything bad about former employees in order to avoid lawsuits, even when the employee was fired for cause. There might be a reason few people bother to contact references/employers.
Data on the accuracy of psych screening is exactly what I was looking for. I've never heard of a double blind experiment on the subject. I have heard, in the Pillar comment section, of priests who coach SSA men to get them past the screening.
But a psych screening for potential abusers is actually trying to do something more difficult: find the people who might, at some point in the future, *become* abusers. Perhaps of college students or 16-17-year-olds rather than young children. At that point they don't actually have a psychological disorder, but merely a moral disorder, and those can be acquired later in life.
Most of my references were never contacted either, but once or twice it actually happened. Once I was actually contacted as a reference though, and it seemed like the only way they were going to get anything regarding poor moral character or psychological disorders from their questions was if I actively chose to spill the beans (answering honestly wouldn't have done it). Of course, no one puts down references that they know have an axe to grind.
From what I've heard, employers have a tendency to not say anything bad about former employees in order to avoid lawsuits, even when the employee was fired for cause. There might be a reason few people bother to contact references/employers.
Data on the accuracy of psych screening is exactly what I was looking for. I've never heard of a double blind experiment on the subject. I have heard, in the Pillar comment section, of priests who coach SSA men to get them past the screening.
But a psych screening for potential abusers is actually trying to do something more difficult: find the people who might, at some point in the future, *become* abusers. Perhaps of college students or 16-17-year-olds rather than young children. At that point they don't actually have a psychological disorder, but merely a moral disorder, and those can be acquired later in life.